| |||||||||||||
How we learn APIsHow we learn APIsPosted Mar 19, 2009 17:35 UTC (Thu) by anton (guest, #25547)In reply to: How we learn APIs by droundy Parent article: Better than POSIX? What you describe sounds very simular to what in-order semantics provides.
(Log in to post comments)
How we learn APIs Posted Mar 20, 2009 13:53 UTC (Fri) by droundy (subscriber, #4559) [Link]
Yes, that exactly describes the semantics I'd like--and the page even gives the same reasoning for it. It seems so obvious that this should be the goal of a file system!
(Although I can see an appeal to relaxing the in-order constraint for IO from different processes... one ought to be able in principle to do that while maintaining in-order semantics if one were to examine locks---and information flow in general---to ensure that you didn't reorder IO that could be causally related.)
How we learn APIs Posted Mar 20, 2009 18:36 UTC (Fri) by anton (guest, #25547) [Link] Although I can see an appeal to relaxing the in-order constraint for IO from different processesWell, given that Unix applications often create lots of processes that interact in lots of interesting ways (think shell scripts), I think it's just too hard to find out when two operations are independent. I also don't think that this relaxation buys much if the in-order constraint is implemented efficiently (by combining a large batch of operations and commiting them together).
|
|||||||||||||