This is two different things.
1) mv within the same filesystem should just be a moving of a reference to an
inode from one directory to another (I'm thinking Unix here - but why would
windows be different)
2) overwriting an existing jar may well not be atomic - so remove it first.
This will undeploy the app, which would be the first thing that the Deployer
would do on a redeploy anyway.
The delete followed by the mv should be two separate but AFAIK atomic (as far
as JBoss is concerned) operations. There should not be a stage where a file is
only half present. It will be there, it will not be there, it will be there.
provided that there is no writing of files, just linking and unlinking of
inodes (or their equivalent) there shouldn't be a problem.
Or maybe I'm missing something.....
Jules
Scott M Stark wrote:
> Because mv is not an atomic operation in general. This is another issue that
> has been
> reported. You try to overwrite an existing jar and its seen as changed
> before
> its contents have been updated.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julian Gosnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 9:27 AM
> Subject: Re: autodeployer bug RE: [JBoss-dev] problems with latest
> jboss-jetty?
>
> > Why not just ftp the file over somewhere else onto the
> > same filesystem, then move it into the deploy
> > directory in a single atomic action (mv/rename).
> >
> > This would not require any change to the Deployer.
> >
> > Jules
> >
> > --- Scott M Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> > This requires a new file for cases that don't have a
> > > problem today. A better
> > > solution is to allow one to lock a deployment jar by
> > > creating a my.ear.lock
> > > that tells the deployer to ignore the my.ear until
> > > the lock is removed.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jim Brownfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 8:51 AM
> > > Subject: RE: autodeployer bug RE: [JBoss-dev]
> > > problems with latest
> > > jboss-jetty?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Would this still leave a problem for people
> > > deploying over modems (I do
> > > this
> > > > all the time)? What if deployment were triggered
> > > by an empty auxiliary
> > > file
> > > > named like the original file (something like
> > > my-ear.dpy for my.ear). Then
> > > > you could ftp (or whatever) the file to the deploy
> > > directory and
> > > immediately
> > > > ftp the empty file afterwards. The deployer would
> > > be scanning for ".dpy"
> > > > files.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Jboss-development mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> > or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
