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

Re: Revised Proposal: Improved locking implementation for fsfs

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke_at_gmx.de>
Date: 2005-01-10 09:53:06 CET

Branko Čibej wrote:
> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>> On Jan 9, 2005, at 2:37 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> BTW, can you lock several files with a single DAV request?
>> I don't think so. The LOCK request is of the form
>> [headers, including authn]
>> [body contains lock comment and lock type]
>> Because LOCK only works on a single URI, the only way to "lock many
>> things" is to lock a whole collection. Which we don't support.
> But does the URI have to identify a file (or collection), or can it be a
> synthetic beastie that identifies a list of resources? In other words,
> is DAV flexible enough to let you define a synthetic collection that
> exists only for the lifetime of one request?

Nothing prevents you from doing that in a server, but it would still be
different from individually locking the files. Keep in mind that a LOCK
request always creates a single lock, which may happen to affect more
than one resource (through depth:infinity). In particular, inheritence
is by URI containment, that is, if you unlock that synthetic collection,
locks on the indirectly locked resources go away (same for DELETE or MOVE).


<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 10 09:54:51 2005

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.