On 20 September 2015 at 00:53, Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org> wrote:
> On 19.09.2015 19:20, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>> On 19 September 2015 at 17:24, Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com> wrote:
>>> On 19 September 2015 at 14:03, Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On 19.09.2015 13:12, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>>>>> On 18 September 2015 at 12:49, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 05:41:41PM +0200, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>>>>>>> That branch is complete and ready for merging, but I'm still not sure
>>>>>>> whether we should merge it or not.
>>>>>> I think we should merge it to trunk now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think this branch can improve much further unless we start
>>>>>> exercising the code ourselves to see how well it's working for us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ANd I believe it's hard to tell whether these changes provide an
>>>>>> actual benefit in practice without running the code for a while.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like the debug and profiling functionality.
>>>>>> This should make it easy to tune the system going forward.
>>>>> Ok. It seems people here generally support 'reuse-ra-session' branch
>>>>> concept. So I'm going to merge this branch to trunk and see how it
>>>>> will work.
>>>> +1
>>> Merged to trunk in r1704048.
>>>
>> The r1704048 broke JavaHL tests.
>>
>> This happens because JavaHL bindings changes content of AUTH_BATON
>> field in svn_client_ctx_t between diferent svn_client_*() invocations.
>> While RA session in RA session pool references AUTH_BATON from first
>> invocation.
>>
>> The most interesting question is it allowed by our API or not?
>
> Unfortunately, I'd say it is because none of the API docs say otherwise.
> Or at least I can't find any.
>
I also couldn't find any of them :(
>> If it's not allowed we just need to fix JavaHL to use the same AUTH_BATON.
>
> I think the most interesting question here is: why is JavaHL doing this
> in the first place? I have to confess I've no idea, offhand.
>
I also have no idea, but I was sort of hoping that you could provide
some insight on this part :)
Anyway, as we are doing this kind of things ourselves in JavaHL, there
could be other API users that are also doing it, and we will probably
break them unless we revv the API.
--
Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2015-09-20 09:40:58 CEST