> ----------------------------- > From: Nate Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Are there filesystem type cases where this might not be the case > > >(NFS being my main concern ....) > > > > No. > > Yes. NFS doesn't guarantee atomicity, because it can't. If the mkdir > call returns, you have no guarantee that the remote directory has been > created (caching, errors, etc...) I can handle it if there is a case where both fail, but is there a case where both can SUCCEED ?? marc. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Marc W
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Drew Eckhardt
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Nate Williams
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Mike Smith
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Peter Seebach
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?... Mike Smith
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?... Lyndon Nerenberg
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Marc W
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Nate Williams
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Marc W
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Nate Williams
- Re: Is mkdir guaranteed to be 'atomic' ?? Matt Dillon