From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 23:16:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 19/44] refs.c: change update_ref to use a transaction
Message-ID: <20140515231615.GR26471@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <1400174999-26786-20-git-send-email-sahlberg@google.com>

Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:

> Change the update_ref helper function to use a ref transaction internally.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@google.com>
> ---
>  refs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
> index 6e5e940..0476892 100644
> --- a/refs.c
> +++ b/refs.c
> @@ -3416,11 +3416,28 @@ int update_ref(const char *action, const char *refname,
>  	       const unsigned char *sha1, const unsigned char *oldval,
>  	       int flags, enum action_on_err onerr)
>  {
> -	struct ref_lock *lock;
> -	lock = update_ref_lock(refname, oldval, flags, NULL, onerr);
> -	if (!lock)
> +	struct ref_transaction *t;
> +	struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT;
> +
> +	t = ref_transaction_begin();
> +	if ((!t ||
> +	    ref_transaction_update(t, refname, sha1, oldval, flags,
> +				   !!oldval)) ||
> +	    (ref_transaction_commit(t, action, &err) && !(t = NULL))) {
> +		const char *str = "update_ref failed for ref '%s': %s";
> +
> +		ref_transaction_rollback(t);
> +		switch (onerr) {
> +		case UPDATE_REFS_MSG_ON_ERR:
> +			error(str, refname, err.buf); break;
> +		case UPDATE_REFS_DIE_ON_ERR:
> +			die(str, refname, err.buf); break;
> +		case UPDATE_REFS_QUIET_ON_ERR: break;
> +		}

The error string already contains the refname, so it would make sense to
do

		case UPDATE_REFS_MSG_ON_ERR:
			error("%s", err.buf); break;

etc here.

It occurs to me now that if ref_transaction_begin fails, presumably
the error string would not contain the refname.  I want to say that
the refname wouldn't help much in diagnosing or recovering from the
problem in that case so it would still be okay to just do error("%s",
err.buf).  What do you think?

Thanks,
Jonathan