Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Dec 1998 12:16:25 +0000 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |