Re: file locking
- From: xhoster@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 09 May 2005 17:24:43 GMT
"Tim Neukum" <timothy.w.neukum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> i have a three programs that run concurrently: call them daemon, user1,
> user2 on a unix machine SunOS 5.9
>
> daemon is long running as the name implies
> it reads and writes to a file that represents a queue
> something like this:
>
> open (QFILE ">+ $queue_file") or die "daemon ERROR: open: $! died";
You've just blown away your file. Is that what you want to do?
> flock (QFILE, LOCK_EX) or die "daemon ERROR: flock: $! died";
> seek (QFILE, 0, 0) or die "daemon ERROR: seek: $! died";
> # process file
> truncate(QFILE, 0) or die "daemon ERROR: truncate: $! died";
> seek (QFILE, 0, 0) or die "daemon ERROR: seek: $! died";
> # rewrite file
Nowhere here do you give up your lock. If you don't care what is in the
file at start up time, and don't let anyone else access while you are
running, what is the point of having it? If it does give up the lock, then
you have failed to show us something important.
> at prompt> addToQueue job
> adding things to the queue file are implemented with exclusive locking
> this functionality works fine and has for some time with
>
> here's my problem.
> user1 is a process started in the background by addToQueue that monitors
> the job while it is still in the queue
> user2 is another process started in the background by addToQueue that
> monitors the job while it is still in the queue
>
> both read the queue file but i want to have a stable state of the file
> when reading, but i get bad file number when i try to flock
....
> sub inQueue {
> open (INFILE, "< $queue_file") or die "user# ERROR: open: $! died";
> flock (INFILE, LOCK_EX) or die "user# ERROR: open: $! died";
> <<-----------this is the culprit
Some OSes don't let you take an exclusive lock on a file opened
only for reading. Sad, but true.
> QUESTIONS:
> i've seen that sysopen may be prefered to open for writing, Why? eg
> sysopen (QFILE "$queue_file" O_RDWR) or die...
The main reason I see for using it is to avoid race conditions when you
want to be assured the file does not (or does) exist before (re)creating
it. I don't see that that applies to your current situation.
>
> why can't i request a LOCK_EX in sub inQueue??
Because your OS won't let you do that on a opened-for-read file.
> if i change inQueue to LOCK_SH....
> if i have two processes using LOCK_SH will they attempt to read at the
> same time?
Yes. Do you (think you) have a problem with that? If so, why?
> will LOCK_EX ever get a chance??
That depends on the details of your code, which we don't see.
> ie will shared locks always succeed if
> another process has a shared lock even if another process is was waiting
> for an exclusive lock
That is entirely up to your OS, and is not up to Perl. I think the answer
is "yes" on most or all OSes/filesystems, but I don't know. (For what it is
worth, on Mysql, at least older versions that I am used to, it is not the
case. I.e. by default a pending exclusive request will block incoming
shared requests.)
> scenario timeline:
> time 0 user1 requests LOCK_SH
> time 1 user1 gets LOCK_SH
> time 2 daemon requests LOCK_EX
> time 3 daemon waits for os to give lock
> time 4 user2 requests LOCK_SH
> time5 ....does user2 get lock? or does it get in line behind daemon.
Turn the above into Perl, and test it on your OS, using the filesystem
you want to use. See what it does.
>
> if the latter, what the $$$$ is the difference between LOCK_SH and
> LOCK_EX????
One is shared and the other is exclusive. I don't know what part of that
you don't understand, so I don't know how to explain it to you.
> if the former (ie user2 gets LOCK_SH without waiting) then how can you be
> certain of the position, interaction within file stream considering user1
> may be reading?
The system (or perl, or something, anyway) does that for you.
> does each process get a
> different pointer into the file position?
That is certainly the case on the systems I use.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
.
- Prev by Date: Re: How can I prevent perl from exiting during a network error?
- Next by Date: Re: how to evaluate values in a hash
- Previous by thread: FAQ 6.1 How can I hope to use regular expressions without creating illegible and unmaintainable code?
- Next by thread: Re: how to evaluate values in a hash
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
