Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site usceast.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!ncsu!ncrcae!usceast!ted
From: ted@usceast.UUCP (Ted Nolan)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: More on 4.2 mail
Message-ID: <2138@usceast.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Dec-84 17:51:03 EST
Article-I.D.: usceast.2138
Posted: Thu Dec  6 17:51:03 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Dec-84 02:40:23 EST
References: <308@sdchema.UUCP>
Reply-To: ted@usceast.UUCP (System Programmer)
Organization: Csci Dept, U of S. Carolina, Columbia
Lines: 28
Summary: 

In article <308@sdchema.UUCP> jwp@sdchema.UUCP (John Pierce) writes:
>While we're on this subject, there is another problem that can also be a bit
>mystifying.
>
>If you have a heavily loaded system and mail gets heavy use it's possible for
>user's mailboxes to get scrambled through two processes writing to it at once.
>Both sendmail and /bin/mail try to prevent this by establishing a lock file
>while they're rewriting the mail file.  Both (understandbly) have code that
>allows a process to break the lock after some number of seconds.  As we got
>it, however, /bin/mail's time limit was 30 seconds.
>
>.................................................. If anyone has a better fix
>I would much appreciate hearing about it.
>
>				John Pierce, Chemistry, UC San Diego
>				{decvax,sdcsvax}!sdchema!jwp

How about having binmail and sendmail use 4.2's flock(2) system call.
Sounds like exactly what's needed.

				Ted Nolan	..usceast!ted
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ted Nolan                               ...decvax!mcnc!ncsu!ncrcae!usceast!ted
6536 Brookside Circle                   ...akgua!usceast!ted
Columbia, SC 29206
      ("Deep space is my dwelling place, the stars my destination")
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------