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

Re: svn commit: r1154393 - in /subversion/branches/fs-py/subversion: libsvn_fs_py/fs.c libsvn_fs_py/fs.h libsvn_fs_py/fs_fs.c libsvn_fs_py/py_util.c libsvn_fs_py/py_util.h python/svn/fs.py

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:50:14 -0400

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:24, Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> Does this also mean that we shouldn't call Python_Finalize().  I'd
> hate to shutdown the Python system when it's still being used by
> another thread in our process...

I honestly don't recall, and would need to look into the Python source
to figure it out.

I do believe that the Initialize call is idempotent. So there
shouldn't be a problem just calling that, and use process-exit as your
Finalize. Definitely leave a ### marker for further research.

Note that I would recommend that mod_dav_svn would hold $something
which then holds the interpreter state. Then for each call into fs_py,
you merely need to worry about thread state. Alternatively, you could
use svn_atomic_once() and stash an interpreter into a global variable.
I suspect a handle for mod_dav_svn would imply an API change (not
necessarily a bad thing to have a create/destroy pair; our IRC
discussion about an svnd may need a similar process-level
initialization in the "frontend").


Received on 2011-08-10 20:50:45 CEST

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.