On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 14:07 -0500, Steven F Siirila wrote: > > Hmm. I wonder how much of a timing window is left; this could be a viable > > option for us. However, I would like to consider our future options for > > mailbox formats other than mbox (we will eventually migrate I'm sure). > > For the mbox case (our immediate concern) your patch seems perfect, provided > that it is performing the read of the access time and the re-setting of the > access time during the time that the INBOX is locked. Timo, is this the case?
That's right. > What we are considering doing is updating our local "mailattrd" to lock > using the same mechanism Dovecot is before reading the access time: > > lock /var/mail/user (open RDONLY, fcntl SETLKW) > stat /var/mail/user (to get last access time) > unlock /var/mail/user (close) > > Unfortunately, it is more overhead. But it should be 100% accurate. That should work. Or I guess you saw my other mail already too? That doesn't require creating the lock, but should be 100% accurate as well.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
