Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 13:37:00 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Doug Lee <dgl@dlee.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is this a good time for a procmail global lock file? Message-ID: <20021123193700.GB4795@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20021123185018.GJ55241@kirk.dlee.org> References: <20021123185018.GJ55241@kirk.dlee.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Nov 23), Doug Lee said: > procmailrc(5) advises us to use per-recipe local lock files instead > of using the LOCKFILE environment variable to set up a global one. I > use LOGFILE to log abstracts for deliveries though, and at busy > moments, these abstracts are getting intermingled, making it > impossible for scripts to process them accurately. > > Is there a better way to prevent this than using the evil global lock > file? It's likely that procmail does not lock LOGFILE, and from looking at the source it writes the abstract with a huge number of separate write() calls. You're probably stuck with using a global lockfile, which should force serial access to procmail. If you only have one rule in your procmailrc, it's no worse than a local lockfile. If you've got a bunch, you might need to log the abstracts manually with a single write call (or rewrite procmail's logging functions). A call to /usr/bin/printf with the appropriate format string should work. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021123193700.GB4795>