> That COULD be atomic, but it may or may not be worth it. If I > understand correctly, you currently do this: > > 1) write to .newheaders > 2) rename headers to .oldheaders > 3) rename .newheaders to headers > > If you instead do > > 1) write to .newheaders > 2) COPY headers to .oldheaders > 3) rename .newheaders to headers the copy operation could take forever and a day is my concern. and in that time, depending on what changed on the repo, the headers are out of date to the rpms. > Then it should be atomic. That's a significantly heavier operation, > though. and you'd have to remove headers at some point. > Another alternative is: > > 1) write to .newheaders > 2) HARD LINK headers to .oldheaders > 3) rename .newheaders to headers > > That's efficient, but requires hard links :) which not all filesystems have, right. -sv
