Hi Tora,
On 06/19/09 09:25, tora - Takamichi Akiyama wrote:
Hi Mikhail,
Mikhail Voytenko wrote:
> I think I see the problem. Probably you have exactly the case when file
> system locking does not work. And the current implementation checks
> whether the file was changed only if system file locking is not used by
> the document. That is of course a bug, actually the OOo locking
> mechanics was introduced to workaround the known problems with the
> system file locking, so the check should be active always. I have just
> submitted a new issue to myself
> http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102701
You mean this?
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102931
Yes, sorry for the copy-paste error.
By the way, there would be some ways to confirm if a target file has
been modified.
(a) time stamp of a target file
(b) digest value of a target file
(c) original content of a target file
The current OOo implementation uses (a). The (b) could be discussed if
there is necessity for check improvement, but it would still affect the
performance.
The (c) is no option from my point of view.
As you know, Subversion is not using (a) to find modified files.
Subversion has completely different task, and has to handle much more
complex scenarios. So it's behavior can not be treated as argument here
from my point of view.
A criteria of "modified" could be reconsidered.
Yes of course, but the coefficient "efforts/benefits" should be always
in mind while doing so.
As time goes, there would be more and more heterogeneous computing
environments surrounding users.
Somewhat unconvincing scenario:
1. A user downloaded (or checks out) her document file from the
Internet disk yesterday.
2. Today, she starts editing the file with OpenOffice.org.
3. She downloads it again since she forgets when she downloaded
it and ensures she has the latest one.
4. She attempts to save current document on the OpenOffice.org to the
file.
5. She faces ...
On the step 5, what should happen?
A) A dialog window appears with a message:
"The file has been MODIFIED after you had loaded the file"
(in fact, the content of the file has not changed, though)
B) Nothing happens since the content of the file has NOT CHANGED,
even its time stamp has been changed, and she successfully
saves the document to the file.
Actually the step (3) should not be possible. Unfortunately it is
possible because of bugs in system file locking, in those circumstances
(A) looks quite good from my point of view.
Without merging functionality, the action with downloading of the
document to get up-to-date version has no sense anyway. And sorry, but I
see no reason to sacrifice the storing performance to let an absolutely
theoretical from my point of view scenario look a little bit nicer.
Especially if the scenario is only possible because of bug in system
file locking.
I am not sure that which is better for current the generation of users:
(A) comparing a time stamp of the file to determine modifications
(B) comparing contents of the file to determine modifications
But I bet (B) would be better for the future.
Please see above. (B) seems to make sense only for the case of shared
documents if there is merging functionality.
Best regards,
Mikhail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
