Hi, Philip Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > Branko Čibej <[email protected]> writes: > > Do we want to support this local svnsync usage on Windows? > Yes. > > If we do, > > someone must implement reliable local locking internally. > That's easy, we just call apr_lock_file_create :)
Lockfiles have a big disadvantage: If the process owning the lock dies (e.g. crash, kill -9, power loss) then a stale lock file is left behind. That's why I mentioned svn_io_file_lock2(); I believe the locks created by that function should always be removed by the OS when the process dies. (But I haven't tested this). I had a quick look at the code, and it appears to support Windows and UNIX. Have you got any comments on the two patches I posted on Friday? Kind regards, Jon ********************************************************************** This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Cabot Communications Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone. Cabot Communications Limited Verona House, Filwood Road, Bristol BS16 3RY, UK +44 (0) 1179584232 Co. Registered in England number 02817269 Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. ********************************************************************** ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
