From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Nov 11 08:22:49 2018 Received: (at 33265) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Nov 2018 13:22:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45387 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gLphR-00063T-FM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 08:22:49 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38428) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gLphP-00063H-VZ for 33265@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 08:22:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gLphJ-00082B-N1 for 33265@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 08:22:42 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47162) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gLphJ-000823-I6; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 08:22:41 -0500 Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=46524 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1gLphJ-0002qE-A5; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 08:22:41 -0500 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Danny Milosavljevic Subject: Re: [bug#33265] [WIP RFC v4] services: Add file system monitoring service. References: <20181105035122.4359-1-dannym@scratchpost.org> <20181105094109.21915-1-dannym@scratchpost.org> <87a7mgwp6e.fsf@gnu.org> <20181111011218.00265d2f@scratchpost.org> <87wopjua86.fsf@gnu.org> <20181111134811.7d48b621@scratchpost.org> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 21 Brumaire an 227 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 14:22:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20181111134811.7d48b621@scratchpost.org> (Danny Milosavljevic's message of "Sun, 11 Nov 2018 13:50:33 +0100") Message-ID: <87a7mfu4tc.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 33265 Cc: 33265@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) Hello Danny, Danny Milosavljevic skribis: > Whoever doesn't handle inotify queue overflow uses the kernel API incorre= ctly - > it's not going to be reliable. It seems that inotify and reliability don=E2=80=99t go together well anyway: http://wingolog.org/archives/2018/05/21/correct-or-inotify-pick-one So I don=E2=80=99t know if what you describe is a showstopper for Direvent specifically, or if it=E2=80=99s just that things aren=E2=80=99t going to w= ork =E2=80=9Creliably=E2=80=9D anyway. WDYT? Ludo=E2=80=99.