On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm with you for a lot of this, but I have to say that I don't think > "atomic transactions" are a feature of general purpose filesystems. If > I store my configuration data with one-value-per-file, how do I > atomically update multiple values? How do I have a transaction that > rolls back changes if changing value #9 of 10 fails? > NTFS now has this. Still does not fix the minimum-block-size problem, though. And you'd probably still want a daemon to handle remote updates. -- miʃel salim • http://hircus.jaiku.com/ IUCS • msalim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora • salimma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx MacPorts • hircus@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
