On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 10:39 +1000, russell muetzelfeldt wrote: > On 19/08/2008, at 10:13 AM, Jeff Rogers wrote: > > John Caruso wrote: > > > > The system needs to be free to do some things to improve > > performance with the understanding that the user needs to be aware > > of those things or risk bad behaviour. I wouldn't call it an > > unreasonable assumption that a file with the same name (and same > > modtime etc) is the same file. > > You can run into a very similar problem with NFS (i.e., attribute > > caching causing a modified file to appear not so) and people have > > learned to deal with that. > > the problem is that this can occur even if the filename is changed, > and I'd argue that pretty convincingly violates the principle of > least surprise. > > yes, of course the system needs to make some assumptions about what > it can optimise, but if the contents of /tmp/userinfo-71562 might get > served back when I've asked for /tmp/userinfo-61453 then there's > something wrong.
If it were not for the fact that the same system is entirely responsible for the situation, then I would agree. What you are really hoping for here is an idiot proof system. The big hole in the reasoning here is that the important thing is the file name with path, and that somehow this name is immutably linked to some content. This is delusion. You want a transactional database but you are using a filesystem. Grow up. BTW, fastpath has configuration parameters. Maybe bone up on those first. tom jackson -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
