On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Um, maybe I'm an idiot. There is after apr_file_lock(), which seems made to > order. Just because I was thinking "mutex" didn't mean I actually needed > one.
Yup, plus apr_file_lock() has the benefit of anything else on the OS doing file locking will also fail - with a 'global' mutex, in order for it to work, it requires a process/thread-level relationship. (APR, by default, will use SysV semaphores with IPC_PRIVATE, so they aren't shared across two independent processes.) -- justin
