[Dovecot] Re: 0.99.10.5 release candidate

[Timo Sirainen]

On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 11:00, Brian Candler wrote:
> > The atomic tmp -> new move prevents of course the case of multiple 
> > (inbound, SMTP) writers. Alas following a recent conversation in this
> > ML with Timo all that saves your butt and mail integrity in the case
> > when a large message being read by slow client gets deleted by another
> > client (dovecot instance) is Saint BufferCache. ;)
> 
> I don't understand that comment either. If process A has a file open, and
> process B deletes it, the file remains (in its entirety) on the filesystem
> until process A closes it. That's not buffer caching; that's the semantics
> of unlink().

I think Christian was talking about NFS, it doesn't follow the
"semantics of unlink()". Rather if a file is deleted and it's tried to
be read later you'll get ESTALE.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20040601/0f9616d8/attachment.pgp