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

Re: SVNClientSynchronized vs SVNClient

From: Brock Janiczak <brockj_eclipse_at_ihug.com.au>
Date: 2005-02-03 10:22:51 CET

Mark Phippard wrote:

>>This may sound like a stupid question, but why do we use the
>>synchronized version of the JavaHL client?
>>The documentation in JavaHL (what little there is) doesn't say whether
>>it is thread safe or not. Since it ships with a non synchronized client
>>I assume it is to a degree.
>>Being able to perform more than one SVN operation at once could have
>>huge performance gains (especially getting statuses. ie decoration)
>I came around long after these decisions were made, so I do not know. I am
>pretty sure from the TSVN list though that they have problems if two
>processes try to access the WC at the same time. So it might not be a bad
>thing that we do not allow concurrent access to the WC. I think I recall
>discussions about this on the svn-dev list too.
I though Subversion had WC locking and the "L" status to stop two
clients modifying the same files at the same time? Since we use
scheduling rules to do most of our operations we shouldn't be
concurrently modifying the WC anyway.

After thinking it though we rarely do more than one SVN operation at a
time anyway so removing the synchronization will give us almost nothing
in most cases. The decoration is done on its own thread and has to be
done serially. It may become a problem when we do more work in the
background though (ie commiting cahnges to two different projects at the
same time).
Received on Thu Feb 3 20:22:51 2005

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.