From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@labs.coraid.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:04:26 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <38a2e7d21538cbb13c98079e39dc3a3d@coraid.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADSkJJXpK-a7m+yGNu3WJgfONdoKjs99okq3eGNLw7sqbiCVOA@mail.gmail.c>
References: <CAOEdRO0MKYpbj0gyu-gM5S1hkOCXGp+=-wnE-J5m_iqxZJWfPQ@mail.gmail.c>
	<f4342e991d3c2498ab0c4b6145311731@coraid.com>
	<CADSkJJXpK-a7m+yGNu3WJgfONdoKjs99okq3eGNLw7sqbiCVOA@mail.gmail.c>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] edit a huge file
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 14e9dc40-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> > i don't think it would be that hard to modify acme to handle large files,
> > but you'd have to convince it to not read the entire file preemptively to
> > make this a useful feature.
>
> that's not true.  it's still useful even with the temporary copy.
> and the temporary copy makes sure things aren't changing
> out from under acme's feet.

i'm not sure what statement you're refuting.  the reason i think
making the copy is a problem for a 7 gb file is the excessive time
it takes for big files.

does the acme temp file get entirely rewritten when one file
changes?  i.e. is this the mbox problem?

- erik