If you invoke the flush primitive then it does this on unix/linux/mac-
osx/iPhone
http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man3/fflush.3.html
&
http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man2/write.2.html#//apple_ref/doc/man/2/write
sqInt sqFileFlush(SQFile *f) {
/* Return the length of the given file. */
if (!sqFileValid(f)) return interpreterProxy->success(false);
fflush(getFile(f));
return 1;
}
On windows it does
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa364439(VS.85).aspx
sqInt sqFileFlush(SQFile *f) {
if (!sqFileValid(f)) FAIL();
/* note: ignores the return value in case of read-only access */
FlushFileBuffers(FILE_HANDLE(f));
return 1;
}
I'll note the api doesn't actually check for errors, give feedback or
whatever.
*cough* it could be failing and give you a clue, but you would need to
resort to FFI to do the file system calls to
get the data to visualize, or build your own VM with that returns the
result.
On 2009-10-22, at 5:31 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm not sure what to make of this one. I just spent a couple of
> hours trying to find the "leak" in an algorithm of mine. It was
> reading roughly 1200 records, claiming to have processed all of
> them, and yet writing only about 450 rows into an output text file.
> One clue should have been that the number of output rows was
> somewhat random; I did not fully appreciate that until I worked
> around the problme.
>
> I tried an explicit #flush - no help. I looked for logic errors and
> found none. The file was being written to a Windows hosted share
> mounted by CIFS (which I am learning to view with contempt) from
> Ubuntu 9.04. You can see where this is going: writing the file
> locally gave the expected result.
>
> Any ideas on how one might further isolate the problem? My trust in
> Windows is well known<g>; I have never liked shared directories; I
> _really_ do not like CIFS as compared (reliability wise) to SMBFS;
> the network between me and the server is in question too (long
> story). All of that said, file support in Squeak, and hence so far
> inherited by Pharo, is not the best code I have seen to date, so it
> is easy to suspect too. Can one argue that since it worked locally,
> Pharo is not the problem?
>
> The little bit that I know of cifs is not encouraging. It sounds as
> though things moved from an easily killed process into the kernel
> which shows an almost Windows-like unwillingness to shut down when
> it cannot see servers. I have found numerous reports of problems
> copying large files over cifs, and I have enountered them too.
>
> Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
--
=
=
=
========================================================================
John M. McIntosh <[email protected]> Twitter:
squeaker68882
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
=
=
=
========================================================================
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
