Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Greg A. Woods
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2003 - 6:47 pm

[ On Tuesday, July 8, 2003 at 22:29:55 (GMT), Christos Zoulas wrote: ]

If there is a sem_open() implementation for an existing NetBSD release
then I'd like to know where to find it.

Or do you mean that POSIX semaphores do need two system calls to create
and initialize a semaphore (and thus require the same care to avoid a
race condition when two processes or threads try to create it at the
same time).  The synopsis for sem_open() suggests otherwise:
"initialize and open a named semaphore".

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;            <g.a.woods@ieee.org>;           <woods@robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1, Christos Zoulas, (Tue Jul 8, 3:29 pm)
Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1, Greg A. Woods, (Tue Jul 8, 6:47 pm)
Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1, Christos Zoulas, (Wed Jul 9, 5:15 am)
Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1, Greg A. Woods, (Wed Jul 9, 8:38 am)