Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> 1. A second ticks by on the client
> 2. A second ticks by on the file server
> 3. Client writes out a file
> 4. Another second ticks by on the client
> 5. The client checks the time, determines that a second has passed
> since the file was written, and doesn't do the sleep(1) before
> exiting.
> 6. The file is modified, but is assigned the same mod time by the
> file server since it's still the same second over there.
> 7. Another second ticks by on the server.
>
> So, maybe we should just always sleep(1) if we recorded any
> timestamps whatsoever.
Yah, I think so.
Greg H, care to make the change? It's issue #542. After a rude fix
like unconditional sleep(1), you could see how it affects real-world
performance and decide based on that whether the issue is fully
resolved or whether further optimization is needed (if any is
possible).
(If not enough free time to do this, please let us know).
-K
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:46 2006