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") -------------------------------------------------------------------------------