Re: Info-cvs digest, Vol 1 #221 - 11 msgs

[Larry Jones]

address@hidden writes:
> 
> However I'm very interested in this comment:
> 
> lj> If everyone is doing update, they're read locks which are sharable, so
> lj> there shouldn't be any significant contention.
> 
> I've notice I ALWAYS get this "waiting for lock" type message.
> I've always had just a single file being commited at a time.

Commits are write locks that aren't sharable.

> ...oh dear as I type this I'm wondering if I've got that & in the right
> place. Was the
> intent of this 'magic rune' to allow the one process to sleep while the
> original did something? 
> (with locks)

Exactly.  The parent CVS process has the repository directories locked
while the loginfo commands are running.  The example starts a background
command and then ends, allowing the current CVS command to complete and
release all the locks.  The background command sleeps for a while to
allow that to happen and then does the update.  The sleep in your script
is completely ineffective.

-Larry Jones

How am I supposed to learn surgery if I can't dissect anything? -- Calvin