[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences)
From: |
David Levine |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences) |
Date: |
Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:22:52 -0400 |
Ken wrote:
> AFAICT, if you reread the sequences file, that will solve that
> problem. I cannot think of a scenario when it does not; can
> you think of one that doing that will fail?
Not off hand, but I can't get beyond "merge conflict".
> Programs that use folder_addmsg() are safe to run concurrently.
> inc does not.
Ouch. Would be nice if inc did, but I'd agree that it's
not something we want to change now.
David
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), Ken Hornstein, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), Ralph Corderoy, 2013/03/10
- Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), Ken Hornstein, 2013/03/10
Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), David Levine, 2013/03/10
Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences),
David Levine <=
Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking (specifically, sequences), David Levine, 2013/03/10