[RC5] LIFO? Is this true?

gindrup at okway.okstate.edu gindrup at okway.okstate.edu
Mon May 11 11:27:45 EDT 1998

     This could easily result in a race condition during a flush if more 
     than one client detects that a flush should occur.  Both will 
     attempt to lock down enough blocks to meet the flush threshold and 
     fail because both of them have some of the blocks locked down.  
     Either they abort and the race condition is recreated or they hold 
     the blocks indefinitely (until one of them has as many blocks as it 
     expected to find).  
     Putting the buff-out in a separate file simplifies the locking of 
     the finished blocks since the entire file can be blocked and the 
     partial locking problem can't occur.  Thus, the race condition 
     doesn't occur.
            -- Eric Gindrup ! gindrup at Okway.okstate.edu

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RC5] LIFO?  Is this true? 
Author:  <rc5 at llamas.net> at SMTP
Date:    5/8/98 5:35 PM

Ok, first my disclaimer, I'm not a programmer unless you consider 
REXX a programming language, but I just had a thought on this 
particular idea.
Instead of a buff-in and a buff-out, why not have just a single 
buffer file.  Which in human terms could look like this (I'm sure 
this would be in hex code and not ascii but you should get the idea):
                            Stephen Berg
//- USAF Instructor  -/-  Team OS2 Member  -/-  Merlin Beta Tester -// 
//- Home = sberg at gccweb.net // Work = berg at trs333.kee.aetc.af.mil  -// 
//-                    http://www.gccweb.net/sberg/                -// 

To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

More information about the rc5 mailing list