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

Re: The /. article

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-02-06 03:10:34 CET

Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> I would point out that it is quite difficult to implement an atomic
> transaction model on top of bare Unix filesystem primitives, and even
> harder on Windows due to the lack of hard links. Use of a database
> gets Subversion atomicity for free.

(Well, this is sort of on-topic, as it may help people learn more
about Subversion...)

The Berkeley atomicity helps, but it didn't give us commit atomicity
completely for free. We still had to do some of the same things in
the db that we would have had to do in the regular filesystem, to
achieve commit atomicity.

I have no idea if it would have been harder or easier to do just using
filesystem primitives. We only had time to do it once. :-) I suspect
that Berkeley helps us support copies/renames more cleanly than we
might otherwise have, but again, that's conjecture.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:37:04 2006

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.