[rrd-developers] [PATCH] add 'flush' to language bindings

Tobi Oetiker tobi at oetiker.ch
Sat Mar 28 17:34:12 CET 2009

Today Sebastian Harl wrote:

> Hi,
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 12:15:02PM +0100, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
> > yes dropping rrd_flush from the api is not a good idea, otoh it
> > does not acomplish anything sensible in the code, so I propose the
> > following:
> >
> > have rrdc_flush for the client flushing function
> > and turn rrd_flush into a no-op for backward compatibility
> I really hope, I do not sound too picky, but this would change the
> semantics of rrd_flush() which would be a backward incompatible change
> to the ABI as well (thus requiring a major soname version bump).
> Please note though, that removing the call to rrd_flush() in the holt-
> winter stuff is perfectly valid (as long as it does not break anything,
> of course ;-)).

well the point is, that this function used to be fflush back in the
old days, at some point it was changed to fsync, which is something
totally different (and wrong). Since fflush has no meaning in the
current way rrdtool writes data, the corrent translation of
rrd_flush would be a no-op, or what do you suggest ?


> Cheers,
> Sebastian

Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland
http://it.oetiker.ch tobi at oetiker.ch ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900

More information about the rrd-developers mailing list