apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: svn commit: r512557 - in /apr/apr-util/trunk: CHANGES dbm/sdbm/sdbm.c
Date Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:34:14 GMT
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 01:12:05AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> On 2/28/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>>> If this was a flag to apr_sdbm_open, or was modified to interact with
>>> the existing locking logic, I'd have much more faith that this is
>>> a reasonable approach.
> The caller could already pass in APR_BUFFERED in the mode parameter to 
> apr_sdbm_open(), AFAICS.

Sounds great.  Let's move this hack to apr_dbm_open's delegate for
apr_sdbm_open, and simply ensure apr_sdbm_open honors the APR_BUFFERED

If this is moved to apr_dbm_, and this flag true for any SDBM that isn't
APR_SHARELOCK'ed, then you'll turn my -.99 to a +1.

If they want to combine any bogus combination of APR_BUFFERED and also
APR_SHARELOCK in an app's call to apr_sdbm_open() they can be our guest,
maybe they will hit the wall and study the correct hacks to make these
behave politely together.


View raw message