xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Atomicity of xfs_fsr -- also isolation?

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Atomicity of xfs_fsr -- also isolation?
From: martin f krafft <madduck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:19:17 +0100
In-reply-to: <87ll9obz2e.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
Mail-followup-to: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <87ll9obz2e.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
also sprach Florian Weimer <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2005.02.16.1104 +0100]:
> Is it safe to run xfs_fsr on a file which is regularly updated?  It
> seems that if a copy is made and later linked as the original, updates
> to the file might be lost.  Is this really the case?

It does say "in an atomic manner", leading me to believe that
updates to the file are not going to get in the way.

-- 
martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck
 
invalid/expired pgp subkeys? use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
spamtraps: madduck.bogus@xxxxxxxxxxx
 
tempt not a desperate man.
                                                -- william shakespeare

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>