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

Re: FSFS propaganda

From: D.J. Heap <dj_at_shadyvale.net>
Date: 2004-04-30 20:34:39 CEST

Branko Čibej wrote:

> Greg Hudson wrote:
>> On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 13:08, Josh Pieper wrote:
>>> I think the proper solution here is to only write the 'current' and
>>> revprop files by using filesystem renames, which are atomic. Then it
>>> would be impossible to read a current file that is in an inconsistent
>>> state. Does that sound good ghudson?
>> That's certainly the proper answer on Unix. I don't know if Windows is
>> any different.
> Yes, I've been wondering about that... I can't find any documentation
> stating that it's /not/ atomic as long as the source and destination are
> in the same volume. That's unfortunately not good enough...
> -- Brane

Worse than that, they won't succeed if the destination file is in use
which it may be here, correct?

The svn_io_* functions sort of deal with this already through the
infamous 'access denied' retry code. I'm not sure if that will work for
what is going on here, though...


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Apr 30 20:35:04 2004

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.