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

Re: attn: ghudson; FSFS and multi-threading on Unix broken?

From: Mark Phippard <MarkP_at_softlanding.com>
Date: 2005-04-05 17:27:16 CEST

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> wrote on 04/05/2005 11:12:07 AM:

> On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 05:46, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> > As you see, I haven't fleshed out the resolution proposal very much.
But I
> > want people to be aware of the possibility that we have a serious FSFS
> > (dataloss?) bug. Please someone (ghudson?), tell me that this is a
> > alarm! :-)
> I don't think it's a false alarm. But as you noted, it's rare to use
> svnserve in threaded mode under Unix. Under Windows, we know you can
> block against a lock you already hold (see recent deadlock issues), so
> locks are effectively per-thread. And I think it's currently unheard of
> for a third-party multithreaded Unix program to be interested in more
> than the network client part of the Subversion libraries.

I think it is possible that this could effect the OS/400 port, but I am
not sure how I could tell. OS/400 is Unix-like and supports POSIX, but it
does not support fork(). svnserve runs multi-threaded and does not spawn
any additional processes. Would this mean that we would be exposed to
this sort of error? If so, how would it manifest?

We use fsfs exclusively in the OS/400 port with either svnserve or
mod_dav_svn for the server. Wouldn't mod_dav_svn also potentially have
this problem? Apache also runs threaded.



Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 5 17:34:42 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.