From: "Sander Striker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 2:33 PM
> [...] > >> Well, samba uses it pretty heaviliy. I don't know about the limited > >> portability, could you expand on this? (is it limited to *nix or do you > >> refer to something else?) > > > > Strictly non-unixes, AFAIK. If I lock bytes 40-44 on a Win32 > > file on a network share or under win9x, I'm locking bytes 0-4095. > > It's not really good about byte ranges, except perhaps on the local NT > > volume between processes. > > Ok, but you wouldn't want your db to reside on a network drive anyway, > would you (this sucks the life right out of performance)? No, not in _most_ cases :-) That doesn't mean it should break. > Also, locally there should be no 4k block size locking issues. If you > read http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/psdk/winbase/filesio_63xh.htm > and http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/psdk/winbase/filesio_39h4.htm > you see that there is nothing mentioned about it (this doesn't actually > mean anything, I know :^P ). I recall older fat based locking schemas used this as well, dunno when it was resolved, precisely (I go back to msdos 1.8, cpm/mpm and xenix, so the details sometimes escape me :-) > LockFile() is available on W95+ and NT3.1+, LockFileEx() on NT3.1+. Hmmm... need to check we aren't trusting LockFile in Win9x/ME then.
