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

Re: svn commit: rev 6110 - trunk/subversion/svnserve

From: Philip Martin <philip_at_codematters.co.uk>
Date: 2003-06-02 19:45:46 CEST

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:

> But, after hacking on this a bit, I think the level of spaghetti factor
> in the current main loop is totally unacceptable.

Do you consider it worse than in the original patch I posted?

> And I think it would
> take me too long to unravel it. So I'm going to be unpleasant and
> demand that you either:
> * Eliminate the -S and -F options (-F never had any effect) and

-F has no effect only if fork remains the default. I see no reason to
change that, but there is little reason to prefer one over the other
as default.

> refactor the code so that there is a completely independent while() loop
> for connection_mode_fork and connection_mode_thread, or
> * Back out your change. It's not maintainable as-is.

I'll look at it, but I think we will have to disagree on the extent to
which the maintainability has changed.

Part of the problem (the only tricky bit in my view) is that the fork
case follows standard practice for pool reuse, while the thread case
needs a separate pool for each thread. Changing the fork case to
behave like the thread case would simplify things. I image any
performance loss due to creating/destroying rather than
clearing/reusing a pool is negligible in comparison to fork.

Philip Martin
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jun 2 19:46:51 2003

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.