From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <168410d616d1f548fd8bcb4b7d3db202@plan9.bell-labs.com>
From: presotto@plan9.bell-labs.com
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] replica (was: ipv6)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="upas-fvyjpyywpnzgtmzceucvigncmp"
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:58:07 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9ecf7a26-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--upas-fvyjpyywpnzgtmzceucvigncmp
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The file is consistent but is the directory? I.e. if I was copying over a whole bunch of files,
could he not have gotten in when I was half way through?
--upas-fvyjpyywpnzgtmzceucvigncmp
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com ([135.104.9.2]) by plan9; Tue May 28 12:56:19 EDT 2002
Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by plan9; Tue May 28 12:56:18 EDT 2002
Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.8.6])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP
	id 4474D19A70; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:56:14 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com (plan9.bell-labs.com [204.178.31.2])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with SMTP id 795FB19A70
	for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:55:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from plan9.cs.bell-labs.com ([135.104.9.2]) by plan9; Tue May 28 12:55:17 EDT 2002
Received: from 18.24.6.158 ([18.24.6.158]) by plan9; Tue May 28 12:55:16 EDT 2002
Message-ID: <38e0f7c1cf60157c1e74879ac4909e6c@plan9.bell-labs.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] replica (was: ipv6)
From: rsc@plan9.bell-labs.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu>
List-Archive: <https://lists.cse.psu.edu/archives/9fans/>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:55:16 -0400

> Could there be a problem if pull has already opened the file
> and is copying it at the time an update is written to it.
> pull would have got the metadata of the file pre update.
> I'm assuming your local updates are faster than remote pulls
> so local update writes can 'overtake' the reads of a remote pull.
> Unlikely I know, but possible?

Nope.  Pull stats the file before and after copying.
If a local write happened in the middle, the qid
returned by the second stat will be different, so
pull will copy it again.  This repeats until the qid
stops changing.

Russ

--upas-fvyjpyywpnzgtmzceucvigncmp--