From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Feb  6 13: 8:41 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BDDD37B4EC
	for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue,  6 Feb 2001 13:08:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f16L68U08880;
	Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:06:08 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:06:02 -0800
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@monzoon.net>
Cc: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
	Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>,
	Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>,
	Charles Randall <crandall@matchlogic.com>,
	Dan Phoenix <dphoenix@bravenet.com>, Jos Backus <josb@cncdsl.com>,
	freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: soft updates and qmail (RE: qmail IO problems)
Message-ID: <20010206130602.X26076@fw.wintelcom.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102061555550.1535-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> <3A805035.C71AAD5E@monzoon.net> <200102061943.f16Jhp365113@earth.backplane.com> <3A805938.96ED890D@monzoon.net> <20010206121357.S26076@fw.wintelcom.net> <3A805F53.F5CD60D9@monzoon.net> <20010206124012.V26076@fw.wintelcom.net> <3A80650D.9FA0BCDA@monzoon.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <3A80650D.9FA0BCDA@monzoon.net>; from oppermann@monzoon.net on Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 09:56:45PM +0100
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* Andre Oppermann <oppermann@monzoon.net> [010206 12:58] wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > 
> > Basically, you want a fsync right before the IPC.  This should
> > bring the metadata up to date with what's in-core and you should
> > then be safe when you reply with your 250 accepted message.
> 
> Like this (from qmail-queue):
> 
> ...
>  if (fsync(intdfd) == -1) die_write();
> 
>  if (link(intdfn,todofn) == -1) die(66);
> 
>  triggerpull();
>  die(0);
> }
> 
> Actually for initial queueing it doesn't even unlink() but leaves
> it to the next program. Can't be more safe, can it?

Only if you don't need the link() to exist after a crash.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message