git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Karsten Blees <karsten.blees@gmail.com>
To: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
	git discussion list <git@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Vicent Marti <tanoku@gmail.com>,
	Brad King <brad.king@kitware.com>,
	Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC/WIP] Pluggable reference backends
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 11:56:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <531EEBCC.10409@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <531D9B50.5030404@alum.mit.edu>

Am 10.03.2014 12:00, schrieb Michael Haggerty:
> 
> Reference transactions
> ----------------------
> 

Very cool ideas indeed.

However, I'm concerned a bit that transactions are conceptual overkill. How many concurrent updates do you expect in a repository? Wouldn't a single repo-wide lock suffice (and be _much_ simpler to implement with any backend, esp. file-based)?

The API you posted in [1] doesn't look very much like a transaction API either (rather like batch-updates). E.g. there's no rollback, the queue* methods cannot report failure, and there's no way to read a ref as part of the transaction. So I'm afraid that backends that support transactions out of the box (e.g. RDBMSs) will be hard to adapt to this.

Just my 2cents,
Karsten

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/243748

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-03-11 10:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-10 11:00 [RFC/WIP] Pluggable reference backends Michael Haggerty
2014-03-10 11:44 ` Johan Herland
2014-03-10 14:30 ` Shawn Pearce
2014-03-10 15:51   ` Max Horn
2014-03-10 15:52   ` Jeff King
2014-03-10 16:14     ` David Kastrup
2014-03-10 16:28       ` David Lang
2014-03-10 19:42       ` Jeff King
2014-03-10 19:56         ` David Kastrup
2014-03-10 17:46     ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-10 17:56       ` Jeff King
2014-03-10 21:07     ` Michael Haggerty
2014-03-11  2:39       ` Shawn Pearce
2014-03-12 10:26         ` egit vs. git behaviour (was: [RFC/WIP] Pluggable reference backends) Andreas Krey
2014-03-12 16:48           ` Shawn Pearce
2014-03-11 10:56 ` Karsten Blees [this message]
2014-03-12 11:43   ` [RFC/WIP] Pluggable reference backends Michael Haggerty

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=531EEBCC.10409@gmail.com \
    --to=karsten.blees@gmail.com \
    --cc=brad.king@kitware.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=johan@herland.net \
    --cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=tanoku@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).