Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:10:08 -0500
From: Mike Kelly <pioto@pioto.org>
To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: notmuch's idea of concurrency / failing an invocation
Message-ID: <20110129111008.1a09bbb6@aether>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim9FEEn6bpeAb1oHVScs4RGbK-UrFY+52ZKWv4E@mail.gmail.com>
References: <87fwsetdin.fsf@kepler.schwinge.homeip.net>
	<8762taxk9y.fsf@algae.riseup.net>
	<87vd1a84qj.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
	<AANLkTi=pPgcPXUN_XTXa0gAkbTR_OF4XxCP-d4-Be2pt@mail.gmail.com>
	<87fwsdobpy.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
	<877hdps6og.fsf@kepler.schwinge.homeip.net>
	<1296228975-ner-3626@everglades>
	<AANLkTim9FEEn6bpeAb1oHVScs4RGbK-UrFY+52ZKWv4E@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1;
	boundary="Sig_/rt5B5s1KAIDLrfcKTh_yLoj";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--Sig_/rt5B5s1KAIDLrfcKTh_yLoj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:57:34 -0500
Austin Clements <amdragon@mit.edu> wrote:

> Yes, exactly.  All of this.  Unfortunately, Xapian doesn't expose the
> ability to block on the lock (see the fcntl call in
> backends/flint_lock.cc, which is hard-coded to the non-blocking
> F_SETLK instead of F_SETLKW), so we'd either need a new Xapian
> option, or we would just have to wrap our own flock/fcntl lock around
> things as you suggest.

Hrm. Do you know if Xapian upstream would be open to a patch to support
optional blocking locks? We can't be the only ones hitting these sorts
of issues.

--=20
Mike Kelly

--Sig_/rt5B5s1KAIDLrfcKTh_yLoj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk1EO+AACgkQokMzJ47YCzoKcACguce/PNy2kSO8kiGLaJH88yL3
Z7YAn2ed8WCJhRto0n4MtzhrVCkqmd/0
=tVyH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/rt5B5s1KAIDLrfcKTh_yLoj--