Malcolm Rowe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 07:59:51AM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
>> We have been through this before. Different processes are allowed to
>> reopen the transaction, and have no shared state between them. Thus,
>> it must be stored on disk.
>>
>
> To be fair, I think Kamesh suggested at one stage that we persist the
> state to disk at transaction-close time, though he didn't explain how
> we'd ensure cache coherency, should the same transaction be opened
> simultaneously by more than one process.
>
> Regards,
> Malcolm
>
>
Malcom,
My point is this implementation(disk-based-hash) is for
convenience(accumulating the data to be written to sqlite), not meant to
be shared across processes, so it need not be written to disk.
Nothing to worry about cache coherency.
With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 13 16:49:55 2006