From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:23:40 +0100 From: Enrico Weigelt To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: <20100113162339.GA24738@nibiru.local> References: <635018e058076d45e5d6bcf01860138a@ladd.quanstro.net> <20100105150340.GF21460@nibiru.local> <5bcb0e528c3837e94d152a7a4410db21@ladd.quanstro.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5bcb0e528c3837e94d152a7a4410db21@ladd.quanstro.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: [9fans] Design of webfs and webcookies Topicbox-Message-UUID: be9cbad4-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 * erik quanstrom wrote: > i think you misunderstand the problem. cookiefs' fs interface > is not the issue. cookiefs' robustness when storing the cookies > on the fileserver in the face of multiple concurrently running > cookiefs' is. ah, you're talking about the situation when multiple cookiefs instances running on the same storage ? hmm, that's the classical multi-access problem ;-O but how do you get into that situation in the first place ? (more to the point: who starts these multiple instances ?) cu -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/ phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@metux.de mobile: +49 174 7066481 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme ----------------------------------------------------------------------