cvs commit: src/sys/kern vfs_syscalls.c

Wed Aug 17 10:43:22 PDT 2005

On 17.08.2005, at 18:08, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
Do the clients issue remove operations?  I was thinking they just send
"rename a to b" the server, which in turn does the job.
No, it doesn't. The check Matt added is in kern_rename, which decides
whether to call the rename VOP or the remove VOP.
A-ha!  I was arguing about the behaviour pattern itself, not about this 
implementation.

Not only remote filesystems would suffer from a race, but perhaps 
layered filesystems as well	(unless they get the locking 100% right).  
Locking nlookup entries doesn't work good enough with NFS so we 
absolutely need to pass the rename operation to the server, no matter 
what, otherwise we loose atomicity (and might loose files).

cheers
  simon
--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low $$$ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \
Attachment:
PGP.sig
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pgp00023.pgp
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: "Description: This is a digitally signed message part"
URL: <http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/commits/attachments/20050817/600f7cf0/attachment-0018.obj>