Re: Checkpoint less frequently (was Re: Still hang on svn 4951 RedHat 7.3 SMP)

Hey,

Forgive me if I'm out of wack here. I'm still getting caught up.
Boy have you guys been busy.

Buuuutttt

Karl Fogel wrote:

>Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
>
>
>>I think *the* major task for 0.19 is:
>>
>> * Create a DB monitor that can detect crashed sessions and
>> automagically unwedge the DB.
>>
If this were to become formalized say in the fs API, I fear it presumes
too much about the DB backend. I hope that it can/would be hidden down
in
the DB specific functions.

>> * Stop creating transactions for read-only requests, and use
>> ordinary locks instead.
>>
Are you talking about BDB transactions? or Subversion transactions? I'm
assuming BDB

>> * Reduce the number of txn_checkpoint calls in our code, or even
>> eliminate them completely.
>>
>>
There are only two that I recall. One in a cleanup function and one in
the trail commit function.
I have always believed the trail call to be excessive. But I don't
fully understand BDB recovery so I have never mentioned it
Like someone else said you still have logs to recover from. Right?
I don't see any SQL impl doing such a thing. These types of things are
handled via DB settings on all the SQL DBs I've worked with.

>Could you expand a little on point number 2?
>
Yes please.

Thanks,
gat
Received on Thu Feb 20 21:13:09 2003