Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] refs: implement simple transactions for the packed-refs file
- From
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
- Date
- Jun 20, 2013, 17:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <51C342B7.5050002@alum.mit.edu>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vd2rgwvvd.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On 06/20/2013 07:11 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes: > >> But currently only the main packed ref cache can be locked, so it would >> be possible for lock_packed_refs() to use the static packlock instance >> for locking. > > Perhaps I am missing something from the previous discussions, but I > am having trouble understanding the "main packed ref cache" part of > the above. "main" as opposed to...?
"main" as opposed to "submodule".
Show 5 quoted lines
> Is it envisioned that later > somebody can lock one subpart while another can lock a different and > non-overlapping subpart, to make changes independently, and somehow > their non-overlapping changes will be consolidated into a single > consistent result?
No, the scenario would be that a git process wants to change a reference in a submodule directly, as opposed to starting another git process within the submodule, as I believe is done now. Maybe it's too far-fetched even to consider...
Michael
-- Michael Haggerty mhagger@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/