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

Re: Another 1.4 release critical bug

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu>
Date: 2006-08-03 15:35:15 CEST

Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On 8/2/06, Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> wrote:
>> Heh, you just proposed what I proposed. :)
>> Basically, for the BDB back-end, we're talking about a significant part
>> of the code. Not to mention that doing this would violate the layering.
> Last night another solution occurred to me.
> So, if we need the DSOs to stick around as long as possible, longer
> than any pool that could potentially hold an svn_fs_t, then why not
> just put them in the global pool? Each pool has a pointer to its
> parent, so we just need to climb up that chain until we hit the root.
> It's not like we're sticking a huge amount of data in there, it's
> bounded by the total number of FS backends, so we should be safe...
ISTR that's not thread safe.

-- Brane

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 3 15:37:20 2006

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.