Path: utzoo!telly!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnewsh!ho5cad!wjc From: wjc@ho5cad.ATT.COM (Bill Carpenter) Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.bug Subject: Re: File locking on shared filesystems Message-ID: Date: 27 May 89 08:43:53 GMT References: <8905070035.AA13356@transit.cs.brown.edu> <89May24.155639edt.30763@snow.white.toronto.edu> <7443@hoptoad.uucp> Sender: nntp@cbnewsh.ATT.COM Reply-To: wjc@ho5cad.ATT.COM (Bill Carpenter) Distribution: gnu Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 20 In-reply-to: gnu@hoptoad.uucp's message of 26 May 89 07:05:26 GMT In article <7443@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: > [performance penalty of GNUemacs file locking] I agree completely. On my workstation, there is a visible lag in the time it takes to make the first buffer modification, compared to those that follow (although I can't be sure if there are other things besides file-locking costing me). Sort of discourages frequent saves. Like John, I don't feel a crying need for file-locking. In fact, since most of the other people I work with don't use GNUemacs, we have other mechanisms for preventing simultaneous edit for "official" stuff. I don't find myself editing other folks "personal" files that often (and I hope vice versa). So another vote for a low-cost way of getting rid of file-locking. (If you saw my posting on the subject a couple weeks ago, just consider it stuffing the ballot box. :-) -- Bill Carpenter att!ho5cad!wjc or attmail!bill