From 4f10cf7434639e01e7b22d4899afbaecd9f5781f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: edward Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:57:40 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] fix typo --- doc/devblog/day_336__pid_locks.mdwn | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/doc/devblog/day_336__pid_locks.mdwn b/doc/devblog/day_336__pid_locks.mdwn index c59e644428..03ca076e65 100644 --- a/doc/devblog/day_336__pid_locks.mdwn +++ b/doc/devblog/day_336__pid_locks.mdwn @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ because then the pid in question can be running on a different computer. Even if you do figure out that a pid lock is stale, how do you then take over a stale pid lock, without racing with anther process that also wants to take it over? This was the truely tricky question of the -day.. +day. I have a possibly slightly novel approach to solve that: Put a more modern lock file someplace else (eg, /dev/shm) -- 2.30.2