On Tuesday 08 January 2002 12:40, you wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 12:03, Robert Davies wrote:
> > I think it's a good suggestion, and it's not just good practice, because
> > FILES is not getting flushed, before it's re-opened as FILES2.
> >
> > Even better would be to open it once, for reading and writing, and write
> > first, and then through the same file descriptor read it back. This
> > method allows you to delete the written file immediately after opening
> > it.
> >
> > I forget how easy that is to do in perl(1), you might have to go to lower
> > level file I/O or one of the modules to do it.
>
> But actually, if it's just a temporary file being output, can't it just
> write to a list in memory instead of writing to disk? That's assuming
> there's enough memory, of course...
Which is the problem! And actually if you delete the file and read it
quickly with ext2, or tmpfs, the file will never actually get saved to disk,
just stay in the VM and/or buffer cache, unless you run out of RAM.
Rob
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.lug.org.uk http://www.linuxportal.co.uk
http://www.linuxjob.co.uk http://www.linuxshop.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue 08 Jan 2002 - 13:26:22 GMT