Sublime Forum

Why is atomic save useful?

#1

is there a particular situation where atomic saves are better than the current implementation?

0 Likes

Lag on saving
#2

Atomic saves are preferable because you will never end up with a mangled file if anything untoward happens while saving.

0 Likes

#3

got it thanks! (any drawbacks for atomic saving?)

0 Likes

#4

You can loose meta data about the file, such as extended attributes and resource forks. OS X and Windows both provide APIs to preserve the metadata, which Sublime Text uses, but these wonā€™t work in all scenarios (e.g., over some network drives), and thereā€™s no equivalent on Linux. You can also get into trouble if editing a file in a directory with strange permissions, e.g., if itā€™s setup to allow modifying existing files, but not create new ones.

0 Likes

#5

thanks, much appreciated!

0 Likes

#6

It also looses symlinks and that is very annoying.

0 Likes

#7

Just remember that atomic save is notoriously bugged in Sublime Text (at least versions 2 and 3), and should not be used until the bugs have been fixed :smile:

0 Likes

#8

Considering Sublime Text 2 doesnā€™t even have the concept of atomic saves - you might want to take this statement with a grain of salt.

0 Likes

#9

Typo from my point :smile: see these posts for a description of the problem:


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12660&start=0

0 Likes

#10

Just for the record: disable this trick in preferences if you want file updates to be visible to concurrent processes by normal means.

i.e. with the default setting, another process that has open(2)'d a file you then open, edit and save with Sublime wonā€™t see those changes because theyā€™re made to a different underlying file.

0 Likes

#11

If your having issues with saved files not being synced to a vagrant box, this setting is the culprit.
set it to false to fix.

0 Likes

#12

I have to use atomic saving, because I have a remote drive hooked up as a mounted Windows SFTP drive. Without atomic_save being ā€œfalseā€ it fails whenever I try to save a document.

Unfortunately, thereā€™s no way to say ā€œatomic save on drive Qā€ and ā€œnon-atomic-save on every other driveā€.

I created a userecho request to do this: sublimetext.userecho.com/topic/516558-/

0 Likes

#13

It should just be disabled. In theory, atomic saving is a good idea, but in practice it just doesnā€™t work. Also, most file watchers will not understand whatā€™s happening with the file (deleted, then another file renamed) and do something unpredictable.

Atomic saving should be done at the OS level imo with a specific API for that which works around all these issues, not by an application.

0 Likes

#14

I also recommend disabling this feature (which I believe should be its default state). I learned of its adverse effects the hard way. I was editing files in a versioned SharePoint document library. Atomic saveā€™s process of deleting the original file and renaming the .tmp file to the original file name completely wiped out all previous versions of the documents I was editing. So much for our audit trail!

0 Likes