Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 21:11:16 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Cc: nate@sri.MT.net, terry@lambert.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The -stable problem: my view Message-ID: <199606080411.VAA05233@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960608112739.15024A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from "Michael Hancock" at Jun 8, 96 11:30:20 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Terry proposes a set of tools to help enforce the policy of always having > ^^^^^^ > > > a buildable tree. Would this make the commit process too cumbersome? > > > > Because these tools are unattainable. Saying 'it would be nice if we > > could guarantee that the tree was always buildable' is like saying 'it > > would be nice if everyone liked everyone'. It's a wonderful goal, but > > it's unattainable given the current resources. > > I said help not guarantee. The tools would help resolve reads while > commits are being done. Multiple reader/single writer locks are a cheap > effective way to do this. Exactly. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606080411.VAA05233>