Subject: Re: heavy use of mmap() & regex ?
To: der Mouse <email@example.com>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/30/1998 14:56:17
> I wasn't deliberately being tongue-in-cheek; I believe this is a bug,
> pure and simple. Two ways (read/write vs mmap) of accessing a single
> object (the underlying file) are defined, but changes made via one
> mechanism are not seen via the other until some ill-defined event not
> under anyone's direct control occurs.
Actually, that mechanism is msync. It's been around for a long time
(in a couple of slightly differing forms, but the basic operations
have stayed pretty much the same).
The problem is that many 'groups' of programs (software systems) want to do:
> programs try to operate on the same file at once, one using read/write
> and the other using mmap.
_without_ bothering to use msync().
Anyway, this is off the topic of the original question. As far as I
know, some pains were gone to to make sure that (though the VM system
and buffer cache are not merged) changes were propagated automatically
(i.e. not reqiring msync()). I'm not 100% it does that, because I
don't care about that functionality. But there were people who I
_thought_ made it do so.
Note that I don't describe "that" as "the right thing." I think it's
wrong for applications to assume consistency unless they use msync().
Why should the whole system have to pay for consistency, when most
uses/programs don't care?
(not speaking for Digital, etc.)