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

Re: svn commit: r21546 - trunk/subversion/tests/libsvn_repos

From: Philip Martin <philip_at_codematters.co.uk>
Date: 2006-09-20 02:33:31 CEST

Karl Fogel <kfogel@google.com> writes:

> Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> writes:
>> Karl Fogel <kfogel@google.com> writes:
>>> How exactly does this prevent a core dump? Since 'subpool' is just a
>>> child of 'pool', I can't see a safety issue with allocating in the
>>> latter instead of the former. A scalability issue, sure, but safety?
>> See this thread
>> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2006-03/1242.shtml
> Thanks. I edited the log message (sorry for the double propedit, I
> found your later message in the thread that explained it better).

I think the use of pool rather than subpool in the original code was
unintentional, although few people encountered the problem because
--enable-dso is not widely tested. I didn't commit the patch
immediately since I wasn't sure whether it was simply hiding an editor
bug, but yesterday I was going though some old patches in my working
copy and decided that unbreaking the test suite was reason enough to
commit it. However, I realise now I didn't reproduce the failure with
--enable-dso using a recent trunk build, I just ran regression tests
with the patch applied. I suspect that the new DSO pool handling has
made the patch redundant and that had I tried to reproduce the problem
I would not have been able to do so. The patch doesn't hurt but I
suspect it no longer really fixes a core dump.

Philip Martin
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 20 02:33:47 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.