[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: problem with svnsync and repository locks...

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 18:58:35 -0500

See this thread:

http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2377143

Realistically today you need to add a pre-lock hook on the slave that
disallows the lock feature entirely.

Mark

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Edward Ned Harvey <svn_at_nedharvey.com> wrote:
> I have a master server, and a slave server configured with pass-thru proxy.
> Off the top of my head, I believe they're both 1.6.12, but I'll double check
> if that is an important detail.
>
>
>
> A user at the slave site does "get lock" on a file.  She gets the lock
> successfully.
>
> She makes a change, tries to commit.  Commit fails because file is locked in
> repository.  (What?  Yeah.)
>
> She asked me for help, and I ensured she did NOT lock in one WC and then try
> to commit from another WC.  All of these operations are happening in a
> single WC, using the slave server for the URL.
>
> She tries to unlock.  Cannot unlock because file is not locked.
>
> She tries to lock.  File is already locked.
>
>
>
> On another computer, I try to lock her file.  Cannot lock - lock belongs to
> her.  (I did not force steal the lock.)
>
> I try to unlock her file.  Cannot unlock, file is not locked.
>
>
>
> I double-checked the revs of the master & slave.  Both matching (we are not
> waiting for an in-progress svnsync to finish from master to slave.)
>
>
>
> The workaround was this:  I made a connection directly to the master and
> forced the unlock.  Then she was able to commit.
>
>
>
> Clearly, the presence of a repository lock is not properly communicated
> between master & slave.  I double-checked my master server configuration,
> and ensured there is both a post-commit hook, and a post-revprop-change
> hook.  Both of which have been working flawlessly for months.
>
>
>
> If necessary, I can reproduce this in a precisely documented way.  But I
> didn't document it that thoroughly yet because I didn't think that's
> necessarily necessary.
>
>
>
> Is this simply a bug that was accidentally overlooked in the master/slave
> design?  Is it a known issue?

-- 
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Received on 2011-01-06 00:59:15 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.