* Greg Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010207 13:05] wrote:
> mouss wrote:
>
> > At 21:25 07/02/01 +1000, Greg Black wrote:
> > >Tony Finch wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why not just use rename(2)? To protect against the new filename
> > > > already existing?
> > >
> > >Why not just read the man page for rename(2) before making
> > >suggestions?
> >
> > I find nothing convincing in the manpage. Could you please tell
> > what I am missing.
>
> Read the man page, and concentrate on the second sentence under
> the Description heading.
I'm not sure if the same problem exists for link/unlink and if
the problem applies to files (not just directories), but there's
a per-FS flag "in-rename" that prevents concurrant rename(2)s on
the same FS to prevent a race where something like this can happen:
/a/b/c
/x/y/z
move /a/b to /x/y and at the same time try to move /x/y to /a/b.
Without a global lock you can mess up the filesystem pretty badly.
I don't think link/unlink can have this problem therefore you might
gain more concurrancy by avoiding rename(2).
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
