The sync and synchronization tags don't seem to be differentiated in any way.
Should they be merged?
1
-
1sync is shorter to type and avoids those nasty s/z problems on different sides of the Atlantic/Pacific.– AndrewCommented Mar 12, 2012 at 21:47
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
Possibly. There's only one counterexample I can think of (Is execution of sync(8) still required before shutting down linux? -- and it's lousy counterexample)
If no other counter-examples come up we can untag that one and make with the merging. (synchronization <- sync)
answered Mar 9, 2012 at 16:02
-
syncis a system call / command, so I suppose a very slim case exists for keeping the tag for that command and untagging/retagging the rest.– AndrewCommented Mar 12, 2012 at 21:52 -
@Andrew I agree, but I only found the one counter-example I noted above in all of recorded history. There are probably good arguments to be made for saving sync as in
sync()though when talking about performance optimization and avoiding said syscall...– voretaq7 ModCommented Mar 12, 2012 at 22:11
I think they should be synonymized.
answered Jan 4, 2013 at 16:07
Do either of them need to exist? If it were the only tag on a question, it wouldn't do much to categorize it.
-
True, but the same argument can be made for "replication", but I feel that's a valuable semi-meta tag...– voretaq7 ModCommented Mar 12, 2012 at 22:10
-
Throw 'em all into the void. If your question is about a certain replication or sync technology, tag it with that. If it's a general question about how to sync files on a certain platform, tag it with that.– MDMarraCommented Mar 12, 2012 at 22:41