From: David Turner Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 15:40:48 GMT Subject: RE: reftable [v5]: new ref storage format Message-ID: <833bc420609e452e8837862eb90f6a43@exmbdft7.ad.twosigma.com> In-Reply-To: > -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn Pearce [mailto:spearce@spearce.org] > In git-core, I'm worried about the caveats related to locking. Git tries to work > nicely on NFS, and it seems LMDB wouldn't. Git also runs fine on a read-only > filesystem, and LMDB gets a little weird about that. Finally, Git doesn't have > nearly the risks LMDB has about a crashed reader or writer locking out future > operations until the locks have been resolved. This is especially true with shared > user repositories, where another user might setup and own the semaphore. FWIW, git has problems with stale lock file in the event of a crash (refs/foo.lock might still exist, and git does nothing to clean it up). In my testing (which involved a *lot* of crashing), I never once had to clean up a stale LMDB lock. That said, I didn't test on a RO filesystem.