From 37a13de8ff931574174a7b64ba6a487b6ef2f754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "http://joeyh.name/" Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:23:21 +0000 Subject: Added a comment --- .../comment_6_90cc6b60718896fb175919417600fdf9._comment | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/design/assistant/blog/day_9__correctness/comment_6_90cc6b60718896fb175919417600fdf9._comment (limited to 'doc') diff --git a/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_9__correctness/comment_6_90cc6b60718896fb175919417600fdf9._comment b/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_9__correctness/comment_6_90cc6b60718896fb175919417600fdf9._comment new file mode 100644 index 000000000..622b141fd --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_9__correctness/comment_6_90cc6b60718896fb175919417600fdf9._comment @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="http://joeyh.name/" + ip="4.154.6.135" + subject="comment 6" + date="2012-06-15T15:23:21Z" + content=""" +But Rich is right, and I was thinking the same thing earlier this morning, that delaying the lsof allows the writer to change the file and exit, and only fsck can detect the problem then. Setting file permissions doesn't help once a process already has it open for write. Which has put me off the delayed lsof idea unfortunately. lsof *could* be run safely during the intial annexing. +"""]] -- cgit v1.2.3