On 29 December 2014 at 17:39, Stefan Fuhrmann
<stefan.fuhrmann_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kotkov_at_visualsvn.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Stefan Fuhrmann <stefan2_at_apache.org> writes:
>>
[...]
>>
>> libsvn_fs-1.dll!get_node_revision_body()
>> libsvn_fs-1.dll!svn_fs_fs__dag_get_node()
>> libsvn_fs-1.dll!open_path()
>> libsvn_fs-1.dll!svn_fs_fs__node_id()
>> libsvn_fs-1.dll!svn_fs_fs__check_path()
>> mod_dav_svn.so!prep_regular()
>> mod_dav_svn.so!get_resource()
>> mod_dav.so!dav_get_resource()
>> mod_dav.so!dav_method_get()
>> ...
>>
>> Given the above, I am -1 on doing this. Please revert this change and
>> other
>> related changes that were supposed to fix the problem.
>
>
> I will keep the added sub-pools in place for now. The problems
> they cause now will always occur when we move code to the
> two-pool paradigm. The DAG cache issue is simply the trigger
> to tighten our pool usage in FSFS.
>
Stefan,
Do I understand correctly that you're basically going to ignore this veto?
--
Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2014-12-30 14:03:53 CET