-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Kelsey Cummings writes: > On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 05:00:55PM -0400, Alexis Rosen wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 04:13:05PM -0800, Justin Mason said: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > > > > Alexis Rosen writes: > > > >Hey, guys. I'm just following up because I'm curious about the final > > > >disposition of the nfslock code. Did you add a function to correspond to > > > >nfsunlock? I hope the rest of my comments were helpful. > > > > > > Actually, we haven't :( It dropped off my radar, unfortunately. > > > > > > I'm thinking we should take a look at that before 3.0.0 release, and > > > > You *really* should. > > > > > probably we should also add a *non*-NFS-safe locking function too for > > > hosts where NFS is not involved -- as I think we could cut down > > > lock overhead quite a lot that way. > > > > Absoultely. NFSlock is at least an order of magnitude more expensive than > > using OS-supported locking schemes. > > And, for that matter, at this point most (all?) NFS implementations > implement locking anyway. It'd be fairly easy to add this to the tests. Yes, but do they implement it *correctly*? ;) as far as I know that's the problem. - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFAcbNAQTcbUG5Y7woRAltjAJ4z+frXsed+L97SQyY1IIdqgaYAngCdFuH8 SpMRIjeKEBe/ahJuALfctpk= =7+Fd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
