>
>
>Risking a serious mauling, I'd like to revisit the idea of putting the
>UUID into a file in the repo after all. The reason is issue 688. The
>only reasonable solution I see for that issue is for the filesystem
>layer to maintain a per-process table of open databases. One way to do
>that is to remember the path to the repository, but in the presence of
>hard and soft links and mount points, that's not foolproof. The other,
>and IMHO easier and safer way, is to remember the UUID of the opened
>repository.
>
>Now to do that, the server must be able to retrieve the UUID without
>opening the FS. So I suggest we put the UUID in a file *in addition* to
>its being stored in a table. There'd be some work involved in
>maintaining that value (e.g., "svnadmin create" and "svnadmin load"
>would have to copy it out of the table in the FS), but I think that's
>not too hard.
>
>Thoughts?
>
If I'm understanding the issue correctly you need a way to make sure
that only one "fs object"/db/process?
Is one open supposed to block on the other or will BDB share the handles
correctly? I didn't get this for the text in 688.
Sorry, I'm a little confused.
gat
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Mar 17 21:54:13 2003