![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Hi, Andrew Morton wrote: >> touché :) but still we should do what we can.. want me to make a patch? > > Not unless we can think of a way in which it actually matters, thanks. > I've written one of those... a migration program from an old fixed-record-size database to SQL. Somebody had the brilliant idea to let two threads read the file concurrently, postprocess the thing (which took a variable amount of time depending on what was in the record) and then feed it to the database (ditto). When that idea didn't work, I used a separate reader thread and coordinated buffer usage with semaphores or whatever, making the thing a whole lot more complicated in the process. :-/ So count me as one of those people who think that it does matter -- if N threads read a file of M bytes, they should collectively get M bytes from it (possibly out of order, of course, but that's a different problem). Anything else would be inconsistent. Same thing goes for writing (in append mode as well as otherwise). -- Matthias Urlichs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:00 [W:0.223 / U:0.050 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||