From: shadow{at}shadowgard.com

On 14 Jul 2004 at 15:55, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> 13-éÀÌ-2004 23:31 _shadow{at}shadowgard.com (shadow{at}shadowgard.com) wrote
> to opendos{at}delorie.com:
> 
> sc> Well, the thing is, copying a file that may change (or need to be
> sc> changed) while you are copying it is generally a bad idea.
> 
>      Wrong. What bad in copying log-file, which permanently increased?

The fact that *unless* you've got SHARE loaded (or something with 
equivalent access controls) copying the file makes it *unavailable* 
to any other procress. 

So your log file couldn't get updated until the copy was finished. 

I ran into this with a logging utility I wrote once. Some idiot had 
oipen the log file in his editor to see what it was. And all the 
computers calling the logging utility were "hung" until I tracked him 
down and got him to close the file.

After that, I had to re-write the utility to "give up" if the log 
file was unavailable for more than some number of seconds. And I 
moved the file to "hidden" directory on the srver.

Remember, without without SHARE functions, you can only open a file 
for *exclusive* access. Most networking software will allow multiple 
processes/usrers to access a file simultaneously *if* the file is 
read only.


--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com





--- Internet Rex 2.29