Re: [PATCH RFC v2] WIN32_RETRY_LOOP on Cygwin

Bernard Blackham wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:57:18AM +0200, Branko ??ibej wrote:
>
>> I'm not so worried about the performance regression since it
>> would only manifest itself in cases where the operation would fail now;
>>
>
> Not quite true - as I read it, the error codes are checked against
> this list after every operation, successful or not (to determine
> that it was infact successful).
>

That code checking hardly counts. The measurable performance regression
would come from the apr_sleep in the loop.

> Anyway, new patches are attached for trunk/1.4.6 and 1.4.5 again. As
> before, I've only tested the 1.4.5 patch (it's still in the middle
> of a multi-gigabyte checkout, but it would usually have failed by
> now :)
>

Looks good. Someone with a Windows box should test this (on both Cygwin
and native), but +1 as far as I'm concerned.

-- Brane

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-05-27 12:52:59 CEST