🚀 go-pugleaf

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes about Rahul Dhesi's code:
 > This "solution" is nothing of the kind.
 > 
 > NFS can report failure on a symlink creation (or on directory
 > creation) even if the operation succeeds.  Any locking protocol that
 > depends on the return code of symlink or directory creation is not
 > robust over NFS.

True, but using symlinks could be a start toward a solution.
Instead of creating symlink pointing to a random place, why not
put your hostname and process ID into the symlink?  Then you
could use readlink() to read the information back from the
symlink and verify that it is your lock.  This beats link()
because you get a file creation _and_ one atomic write which you
can use for identification purposes.

 > NFS's statelessness is supposed to be a feature.  Well, as far as I'm
 > concerned, the designers of NFS can go take a flying leap, and they
 > can take their stateless protocol with them.

No argument here.

kyle jones   <kyle@uunet.uu.net>   ...!uunet!kyle

Oh, yeah, that was that package that I was having so much trouble
installing.  There was a combination of things going wrong, and
to make the story short, someone should go back in time and
shoot the person who invented NFS.  And then bugger the corpse.
	- one very unhappy system administrator