Re: Exclusive-access locking of maildrop

[Glenn Anderson <[e-mail]>]

>One thing I'd like to see removed from the POP3 spec. is
>the requirement to have an exclusive-access lock on a
>maildrop.  (See p. 4 of RFC 1460.)
>
>This seems to be motivated by the standard UNIX maildrop
>format where all messages are kept in a single file.  If
>you use a different approach to maildrop management such
>as keeping messages in individual files in a directory,
>there is no need to lock the maildrop.
>
>I suggest changing to spec. to say that a server MAY
>acquire an exclusive-access lock if it is desirable, but
>that it is not required.

I have to say I would also like to see this changed as my server does not
acquire an exclusive-access lock on maildrops. This is possible as messages
are only flagged to be deleted and are not actually deleted until all
threads release the maildrop. Also, new messages that arrive after the
server enters transaction state are ignored. I think it will be necessary
to replace the requirement for an exclusive-access lock with some sort of
restrictions to this effect.

Glenn.

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
! Glenn Anderson, Technical Assistant, Systems, University of Otago Library !
! Internet:[e-mail]                              !
! "Knowledge is like a jigsaw puzzle, no matter how many pieces you've got, !
! if you can't put them together, you won't see the whole picture"          !
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
! Opinions are not in my job contract so my employers have no claim to them !
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+