[GH-ISSUE #367] Asynchronous writes #189

New issue

Open

opened 2026-03-04 01:43:05 +03:00 by kerem · 2 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:43:05 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @zubryan on GitHub (Feb 27, 2016).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/367

Hi
I need a feature like this:
After putting files in cache dir, asynchronously send files to S3, then I don't need to wait.

Is it possible? or it has already had this feature?

Thanks,
Bryan

Originally created by @zubryan on GitHub (Feb 27, 2016). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/367 Hi I need a feature like this: After putting files in cache dir, asynchronously send files to S3, then I don't need to wait. Is it possible? or it has already had this feature? Thanks, Bryan

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:43:06 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2016):

s3fs could not transfer a object asynchronously as normal, but you can specify ensure_diskfree option and it may help you.
This option means "sets MB to ensure disk free space".
So you set large value for this, s3fs probabry transfer a object asynchronously.

You can load latest codes from master branch for ensure_diskfree option.
Please try to use and set it.

Regards,

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Mar 6, 2016): s3fs could not transfer a object asynchronously as normal, but you can specify ensure_diskfree option and it may help you. This option means "sets MB to ensure disk free space". So you set large value for this, s3fs probabry transfer a object asynchronously. You can load latest codes from master branch for ensure_diskfree option. Please try to use and set it. Regards,

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:43:06 +03:00

Author

Owner

@gaul commented on GitHub (Feb 2, 2019):

@zubryan this is called a write-behind cache. Generally network file systems do not implement this because there is no way to tell the application when the transfer fails, e.g., during network disconnection.

@gaul commented on GitHub (Feb 2, 2019): @zubryan this is called a write-behind cache. Generally network file systems do not implement this because there is no way to tell the application when the transfer fails, e.g., during network disconnection.