> From: Garrett Rooney [mailto:rooneg@electricjellyfish.net]
> Sent: 18 September 2002 22:07
> Bill Tutt wrote:
>
> > Isn't this because we aren't talking to the datastore properly in the
> > first place? Our database should NEVER get wedged. I thought we'd talked
> > about how to fix this. We should work on that rather than this approach.
> > If we're not willing to tackle that work item for 1.0 then I begin to
> > wonder about what skewed ideas people might have about how
> > stable/reliable a 1.0 relase of Subversion should be.
>
> [snip]
>
> > If you could refresh my aging brain on why the database gets wedged and
> > why we're not addressing that before doing things this way I'd greatly
> > appreciate it.
>
> well, right now, it can easily get wedged just because of the fact that
> there is no attempt to catch a SIGINT, so you hit control-c and your
> process just exits. if you're holding locks inside berkeley db, then
> you don't clean them up, so the repos can get wedged. without some kind
> of cancelation support, this is unavoidable.
Uhm. But we had quite some discussion on how to handle wedged repositories.
Basically we need to fix the way we open the repository. Can we please
revisit the proposed fixes in those threads first? That would effectively
solve your problem aswell.
Sander
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 18 22:19:08 2002