Re: Exclusive Locking: design in a nutshell

Greg Stein wrote:

>Seems like a mini-think-reset is needed. To use Branko's term, a PUT might
>simply be a checkpoint, and an UNLOCK is simply a release of the lock (no
>commit action).
>
Yup.

>It may be that transactions are not needed either.
>
>
We could probably avoid them, yes, but I'd prefer to keep the current
transaction-per-lock design, so that we can support cooperating clients
in the future. By "cooperating" I mean client processes that share a
lock ID, or distinct clients that use a shared lock to make coordinated
changes that result in a single commit. Both of these notions would be
extremely useful in, e.g., a Subversion VFS plug-in for Samba. They're
not so useful for a command-line client, of course, but that would do a
single PUT at commit time anyway.

I wonder if we can do magic over DAV that lets the server decide when to
do a write or a checkpoint on PUT depending on parameters...

-- Brane

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu May 20 09:39:24 2004