lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: NFS in 2.1.130??
On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 03:59:51PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > This will not work. No kind of dot-locking will work with an NFS client
> > that caches data, which includes Linux 2.0.x and Linux 2.1.x, unless you
>
> procmail style dot locking works over NFS. NFS has an atomic rename,
> even though they screwed everything else up in NFSv2. Rename is the only
> real NFS safe operation to use.

I appreciate that the _locking_ works, but dot-locking does not flush
writes or revalidate cached reads on the locked file, does it?

This is a cause of lost mail amongst other things.

Of course, if you do fcntl-locking _as well_, and the nfs client
guarantees proper ordering of reads & writes around the lock, everything
should be ok.

-- Jamie


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.077 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site