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

Re: Strategy for FSFS locking fix and 1.2

From: Mark Phippard <MarkP_at_softlanding.com>
Date: 2005-04-13 20:44:58 CEST

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> wrote on 04/13/2005 02:40:19 PM:

> On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 14:36, Mark Phippard wrote:
> > If only parts 1 and 2 are implemented, does that still "solve" the
> > when the repos is being accessed ONLY by svnserve or mod_dav_svn?
> Yes, with the proviso that the mutex initialization isn't completely
> thread-safe. (But the window of failure is very small.)
> I feel like you have some misconception, though; why would it matter if
> the repos is being accessed "ONLY" by one or both of those two methods?

I am just trying to understand the implications of not doing part 3 right
away. It sounds like part 3 makes it a better architecture, but with
steps 1 and 2 in place, the problem is essentially solved. I just wanted
to make sure that steps 1 and 2 are not just "infrastructure" where the
problem is not fixed until step 3, which sounds like it is being deferred
to svn 1.3.



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 Wed Apr 13 20:45:47 2005

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