On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why should I have to cleanup???
>> svn update (see point 2) KNEW the file is in use, so instead of leaving locks around it could just have skipped that file and print a message that not everything have been updated.
> The problem is that, at the point where svn runs into this locked
> file, half of the work has already been done (the metadata in wc.db
> has already been updated). The remaining work (moving the file into
> place) is scheduled in a specific table called the work_queue. The
> work_queue *must* be run to completion to get back into a valid state.
> It cannot be rolled back (undoing the other part in wc.db), at least
> not with the current design.
So a process that is supposed to be atomic isn't...
> 'svn cleanup' removes any working copy locks, and runs whatever is
> left in the work_queue, thereby returning the working copy to a valid
> BTW, the work of moving the file into place has some sort of
> "retry-loop", where it keeps retrying for a couple of seconds (to
> account for anti-virus scanners and such, where the file is locked for
> only a short time). But it can't keep waiting forever, so if the file
> is locked for a long time, "update" will have to give up.
So how is the user supposed to know better about what to do next than
the program that is aware of the situation?
Received on 2012-06-13 17:17:38 CEST