On 4/30/07, Andrew Bennetts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does MOVEFILE_REPLACE_EXISTING mean the rename over an existing file is > actually > atomic? I cannot find any MSDN docs that say so (and I've seen some that > suggest to me that it probably isn't).
Even though MSDN docs do not say it explicitly, I found some discussions claiming that MOVEFILE_REPLACE_EXISTING is atomic. However, after seeing your comment, I did a more thorough search and I too found some references claiming otherwise. As a last resort, I checked cygwin documentation which claims that it's rename() is POSIX.1 compliant. If I am not mistaken, POSIX.1 does require atomicity so I am curious how rename() is implemented there. I checked out the sources and I will try to find more about their implementation. I completely agree that without positive proof of atomicity, there is no point in making this code change. > Also, I assume this cannot replace files that are in use? A simple test shows that it can indeed replace files that are open. Thanks, Raghu _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
