tridge at samba.org
Wed Apr 11 14:41:33 GMT 2001
> That's a pretty strange design though. Once a client has closed a
> file it really should ensure an update on the server (IMHO).
ahh, thats the whole point of batch oplocks.
> The idea of keeping oplocks across file open/closes just "in
> case" the file will be opened again is rather risky (IMHO).
> This is one of the things I don't like about Windows oplocks.
I've grown to like it. It is a great idea when you are doing things
like compiling on a network drive, it means the 2nd compile is
More information about the samba-technical