On 12-05-07 12:51 PM, Jan Wieck wrote: > On 5/7/2012 10:16 AM, Steve Singer wrote: >> On 12-05-07 10:09 AM, Steve Singer wrote: >>> On 12-05-05 10:14 AM, Jan Wieck wrote: >>>> On 5/2/2012 5:39 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
> > Me too and I agree that O_EXCL certainly isn't the best way to do it. > However, the presented patch does not change any existing functionality > (except for the exclusiveness in creating the temp file). > > While there remains a possible race condition when using NFS, the log > file I examined would very unlikely slip through it. Remember, the first > process must have written more than 32K before the second process calls > open(2). > > What I intended with this simple patch was to give Richard a chance to > identify the processes involved in creating this problem. Up to this > moment we don't even know exactly how this happens. Sorry, I was thinking you were proposing this patch for commit on the 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 branches not just for Richard. I wouldn't be opposed to a patch that doesn't make things worse on nfs/cifs systems (if it compiles on win32). I think we both agree that the real problem is what is causing two files to be opened at the same time, and we don't yet have a handle why that is the case. > > > Jan > _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
