From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:17:36 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Windows: Skip fstat/lstat optimization in write_entry()
Message-ID: <7vbpqrdnyn.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090420133305.GE25059@dpotapov.dyndns.org>

Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 02:58:49PM +0200, Alex Riesen wrote:
>> 2009/4/20 Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@gmail.com>:
>> > The cygwin version has the same problem. (In fact, it is even worse,
>> > because we have an optimized version for lstat/stat but not for fstat,
>> > and they return different values for some fields like i_no). But even
>> > if we used the only Cygwin functions, we would still face the problem,
>> > because Windows returns the wrong values for timestamps (and maybe
>> > even size on FAT?). So I think the following patch should be squashed
>> > on top.
>> 
>> I just sent a patch with an "optimized" fstat. I see no problems (at least none
>> like these) with that patch. Timestamps match. Windows XP, yes. But since
>> that MSDN article mentions that it is not guaranteed, I guess I just been lucky.
>
> If the time passed between the creating file and end of writing to it is
> small (less than timestamp resolution), you may not notice the problem.
> The following program demonstrates the problem with fstat on Windows.
> (I compiled it using Cygwin). If you remove 'sleep' then you may not
> notice the problem for a long time.

I take that you mean that Alex's patch does not work as intended.  In the
meantime, I've squashed your one-liner "Cygwin-too" into Hannes's patch.

Thanks.