Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:57:38 +0100
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel.bkbits.net off the air
Message-ID: <20031110165738.GD6834@x30.random>
References: <20031110132617.GA6834@x30.random> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311100844190.1821-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311100844190.1821-100000@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1309
Lines: 27

On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 08:49:20AM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> 
> > same here, however the rsync export on kernel.org is lacking a two
> > sequence number locking that would allow us to checkout a coherent copy
> > of the cvs repository.  Currently it works by luck.
> 
> Peter, how the current rsync BKCVS root is updated at kernel.org? Is 
> coherency guaranteed in some way?

our rsync isn't going to be coherency guaranteed anyways, no matter how
the updates shows up on kernel.org, rsync can't even hang on per-file
locks, sure it can't be coherent as a whole.

The best way to fix this isn't to add locking to rsync, but to add two
files inside or outside the tree, each one is a sequence number, so you
fetch file1 first, then you rsync and you fetch file2, then you compare
them. If they're the same, your rsync copy is coherent. It's the same
locking we introduced with vgettimeofday.

Ideally rsync could learn to check the sequence numbers by itself but I
don't mind a bit of scripting outside of rsync.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/