This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author pitrou
Recipients eric.araujo, eric.smith, exarkun, giampaolo.rodola, meatballhat, milko.krachounov, neologix, olemis, pitrou, tarek, vstinner
Date 2011-12-23.13:13:22
SpamBayes Score 0.000149039
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1324645958.3388.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <>
> > Does it have to be a class? What would be the operations apart from
> > write()?
> Well, I thought that making it a file-like object could be useful:
> that way, one could pass it to pickle.dump(), logging.StreamHandler or
> any method expecting a file-like object, and would gain atomicity
> (persistency) transparently, without refactoring.

Mmmh... I might have misunderstood the proposal then. I thought this
"atomic write" API was about writing the file contents in one go and
immediately closing the file. If you want atomicity to apply to logging,
you must instead guarantee the durability of each write() call, meaning
calling fsync() on each logging call, which would be very expensive.

Am I missing something?
Date User Action Args
2011-12-23 13:13:23pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, exarkun, vstinner, eric.smith, giampaolo.rodola, tarek, eric.araujo, olemis, meatballhat, milko.krachounov, neologix
2011-12-23 13:13:22pitroulinkissue8604 messages
2011-12-23 13:13:22pitroucreate