From: Felipe Contreras Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:23 +0000 (+0300) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ruby: make sure the database is closed X-Git-Url: http://git.tremily.us/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=9b1ff2acaaefca17be815f09c7a2c5810903aee2;p=notmuch-archives.git Re: [PATCH] ruby: make sure the database is closed --- diff --git a/be/cc32d4172bd1d07767c49a95e1f43639dd8a91 b/be/cc32d4172bd1d07767c49a95e1f43639dd8a91 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..cdf8653fd --- /dev/null +++ b/be/cc32d4172bd1d07767c49a95e1f43639dd8a91 @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA4B1431FAF + for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:45:27 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.799 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, + FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id 9EJoSm1zJ7WM for ; + Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:45:26 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from mail-ee0-f53.google.com (mail-ee0-f53.google.com + [74.125.83.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client + certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id + 5B548431FAE for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:45:26 -0700 + (PDT) +Received: by eekb47 with SMTP id b47so17209eek.26 + for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; + h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to + :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; + bh=Mw+5107Em+k4IeaifxjICdR6z2LCM/P0wyPcYzcBQ54=; + b=XojguKhbBk5PVo6u7YZJFqJf+baf6MzlMM+bgsgV5+43sQ0jak3iWYfDTX/XpehQBw + YK8KQ8yooKWLn8eUD6n9Jj9ymjL6Kr0uE7cCtAoTP1AwQH8swff/OVCV4VXGeLU0coTI + yiEyO7p7k3HDU7zqtphQB5+Z9EGM1Oo6TMlg7ya1NSuI91HFD1mKvxQpZidInv7uue/D + ZS/Jfstfq4mc5A47mSiP8AZN5fTPfB94Kr+eRnlliQ77LhR0Qb+Dgb5mSuSOOa/1mgMt + +HVeuOooMW9800ixIJQPXrkbD1sH2eNyoICJ+B1fncZsvFMFtIJKSfuNjNV3jaMdzpjW + MFfQ== +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.213.9.209 with SMTP id m17mr1424450ebm.19.1335221123501; Mon, + 23 Apr 2012 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.213.103.18 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:45:23 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: + +References: <1335185032-13075-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> + + + +Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 01:45:23 +0300 +Message-ID: + +Subject: Re: [PATCH] ruby: make sure the database is closed +From: Felipe Contreras +To: Ali Polatel +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:45:28 -0000 + +On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Ali Polatel wrote: +> 2012/4/23 Felipe Contreras : +>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Ali Polatel wrote: +>> +>>> I'd rather not do this. +>>> Please read: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.ruby.general/320= +324 +>> +>> OK, I've read this.. So? +> +> You are one step close to what I thought you had thought. + +I don't parse that. I meant that _now_ I've read it. + +>> The order in which Ruby's garbage-collector frees the database and +>> other objects is irrelevant, because with this patch we are not +>> manually freeing other objects, only the database. +> +> What I wanted was to make all objects "depending" on the database to be u= +nusable +> once the database object is freed. Seeing that's not practically easy +> I decided to leave +> it to the user. + +Well, sure, but if the user has problems, the user can keep the +database object around. + +Personally I don't see why an object, like say a query would remain +working correctly after the database is gone, either by calling +.close() directly, or just loosing the pointer to the original object. +I don't think users would expect that, or, even if they somehow found +it useful, that most likely would be very seldom, and hardly worth +worrying about it. + +>> Sure, it's _better_ if the user calls close(), even better if it's +>> inside an 'ensure', and even better if blocks are used (which I am +>> using in most cases), but that's not *required*. +> +> If you have such a use case, I'm fine with that patch. +> I might push it in the next few days or get someone else to push it. + +I did at some point, not sure if I do now. But that's beside the +point, the point is that it really does happen. + +>> The user might just do: +>> +>> def foo +>> =C2=A0db =3D Notmuch::Database.new($db_name, :mode =3D> Notmuch::MODE_RE= +AD_WRITE) +>> end +>> +>> That's perfectly fine in Ruby (although not ideal), since 'db' will +>> get garbage-collected. But nobody will be able to use the database +>> again until that process is killed. +>> +>> You think that's correct? +> +> Yes that is correct. I have not thought about this. +> I'd say it's a partial misunderstanding on my part due to lack of +> (and/or too much) vodka. + +Well, there's only two options. + +a) This works: + + def foo + db =3D Notmuch::Database.new($db_name, :mode =3D> Notmuch::MODE_READ_WR= +ITE) + end + +(as in; the database gets closed eventually) + +b) This works: + + def start_query(search) + db =3D Notmuch::Database.new($db_name) + return db.query(search) + end + +(as in; the query returned would keep working properly) + +I personally don't see why anybody would want b), and if they have +problems with code like that, I think it's obvious to see why. + +I think we should go for a) and thus apply the patch. + +Cheers. + +--=20 +Felipe Contreras