Date: Sun, 7 Nov 1999 16:37:18 +0100 From: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Serious locking problem in CURRENT Message-ID: <19991107163718.A15753@keltia.freenix.fr> In-Reply-To: <19991107115106.A15177@walton.maths.tcd.ie> References: <local.mail.freebsd-current/19991105225916.A14961@keltia.freenix.fr> <local.mail.freebsd-current/19991106005016.A865@keltia.freenix.fr> <local.mail.freebsd-current/19991106134548.A2921@walton.maths.tcd.ie> <199911061929.NAA26145@free.pcs> <19991107020102.A9992@keltia.freenix.fr> <19991107115106.A15177@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
According to David Malone: > But if the real master process forks and then it's child closes the fd > which the lock was on, then the master process will have lost it's lock. > Is this likely? Does the real master fork children to do stuff? All the time. "master" is an inetd-like daemon which spawn children according to master.cf. Everything run by Postfix is a child of "master"... I see your point and that's likely what happen. You're confirming what I thought about locking brokeness. That's bad. -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 4.0-CURRENT #75: Tue Nov 2 21:03:12 CET 1999 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991107163718.A15753>