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

Re: Merge ra-reuse-session branch to trunk or not?

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:47:30 +0200

On 20.09.2015 09:40, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> 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.

Here's one more data point that has nothing to do with JavaHL: The
svn-x64-macosx-bdb builder started failing after the merge:


-- Brane
Received on 2015-09-21 11:47:43 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.