> :Or fix it to be atomic ;-) > > I don't think the possibility exists: at the point we have a complete > file prepared to replace the original, it is still a non-atomic two > step process to unlink the old file and replace it with the new. If the new file is on the same filesystem as the old file, the rename() call does precisely what we want. No previous unlink() is necessary. > I'm not aware of any mechanism that would guarantee the original > filename would point to valid data under every possible failure mode. I have heard that the universe does not support atomic operations (although I have not seen the code.) If this is true, perhaps we should report the bug to the manufacturer. DEFECT REPORT SDR #11-60903 SYSTEM VERSION COMPONENT Universe 2.5 Core It appears that there is an arbitrary limitation on the velocity with which the system is able to effect the internal transmission of information. As a result, our applications are having synchronization problems and race conditions when used over long distances or brief intervals, and it is difficult to perform atomic updates of complex structures. Have we configured something incorrectly? Also, we are having the most difficult time getting the electrons to stay where we put them. They keep jumping all over the place. Is this perhaps related?