From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.acm.org>
Subject: Re: Direct_Io for Filesystem question
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:14:11 GMT
Date: 2008-10-24T00:14:11+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <nr8Mk.402511$yE1.157144@attbi_s21> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dbd243e1-dbf9-43cf-a2ff-6d70e5327cab@v30g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>
mhamel_98@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I'm not *certain* I understand what you are saying, but my
> interpretation of it led me to wrapping the direct_io.file_type and
> its functionality in a protected type and bingo, all is well. I'm
> curious if you meant something altogether different.
Yes, that's what I meant. Technically a protected object is wrong, because I/O
operations are "potentially blocking".
--
Jeff Carter
"When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely
turned his tail and fled."
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
60
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-24 0:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-23 19:52 Direct_Io for Filesystem question mhamel_98
2008-10-23 21:54 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2008-10-23 23:14 ` mhamel_98
2008-10-24 0:14 ` Jeffrey R. Carter [this message]
2008-10-23 22:13 ` anon
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox