Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:17:57 -0500 (CDT) From: Sergey Babkin <babkin@verizon.net> To: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: f_offset Message-ID: <25637504.3015221208186277561.JavaMail.root@vms063.mailsrvcs.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> >In message <20080414145231.GJ5934@hoeg.nl>, Ed Schouten writes: > >>It's all so confusing that the standards seem to change then. When I >>take a look at the POSIX onlinepubs, the articles seem to mention the >>opposite: >> >>http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/read.html >> >> "The behavior of multiple concurrent reads on the same pipe, >> FIFO, or terminal device is unspecified." >> >>http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/write.html >> >> "This volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 does not specify behavior >> of concurrent writes to a file from multiple processes. >> Applications should use some form of concurrency control." > >Remember that POSIX was written so both MVS and Windows could comply, And nowadays Linux too :-) >UNIX may have and need higher standards. Yep. Linux in this respect is not Unix. This behavior of Linux is pretty annoying (the log files get mixed up pretty badly) but I agree that it makes the writes on the highly contested files faster. -SB
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?25637504.3015221208186277561.JavaMail.root>