Preliminary Suggestion For Atomic Transactions

[Carson Gaspar]

--On Wednesday, January 05, 2005 21:51:25 +0100 Dag Wieers <dag at wieers.com> 
wrote:

> As you picked up correctly from the previous thread, it's not atomic, I
> called it near-atomic.
>
> But it's a trade-off between not having to hardlink a whole lot of files
> (in my case 300.000 files for each transaction), making it possible to
> sync with more then one client, not having to configure a directory and
> having it inside rsync (which could work both ways and does not require a
> wrapper).

I have no objection to the option, just to the name - don't call things 
atomic if they aren't. Call it delayed-rename, or whatever.

-- 
Carson