The test case proves that it does.

The comment of the method is,

    "When writing, flush the current buffer out to disk."

I know what filesystem I deploy to, but Squeak appears to be silently
ignoring this (rather important) expectation about #flush, that its own
comment presents.

  - Chris



On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 6:15 PM Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> Do you expect #flush to write the changes to disk?
>
> Levente
>
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020, Chris Muller wrote:
>
> > Magma has been stable in 5.2 for a long time under an older VM, all
> tests pass.  But by changing ONLY the VM (not the image) to the new
> release-candidate, it fails the forward-recovery test.  This test tests the
> scenario of a
> > server failure during mid-write.  Unless I change
> StandardFileStream>>#flush as in Files-cmm.182, the recovery data which
> Magma relies on #flush to ensure is preserved is, in fact, not preserved.
> It appears to be a breakage
> > of the contract which causes the test to fail.  This functionality is
> important to avoid corrupting databases.
> > I saw a discussion on the Cuis list in which someone was asserting that
> flush is no longer necessary(!!), and made a vague reference to a "thread
> on squeak-dev" which I never found.
> >
> > I hope this is just an oversight, otherwise I'll have to rely something
> like Files-cmm.182, which is half the speed of the old #flush.
> >
> > Best,
> >   Chris
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200113/fb343c25/attachment.html>