Re: [siesta-dev] preferences

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2002/10/10]

From: Nicholas Clark
Subject: Re: [siesta-dev] preferences
Date: 17:45 on 10 Oct 2002
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 05:29:53PM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
> what I'm thinking is that a Storage implementation has to implement
> set_config (or preference, since that's what it actually is)
> get_config
> del_config 

> thoughts? comments?

The first thought I had was "Do you want some sort of atomic update config?"
on the assumption that currently an update is get <change> set

My second thought was does it matter?

However, is there any sort of sanity locking - presumably a race condition
can exist where (say) two e-mails both requesting configuration changes
can arrive, execute simultaneously:

get1, get2
change 2, change 1
set1, set2

and if change 2 and change 1 are different  partial changes to the
configuration hen they might be contradictory, and result in a mess.

just a thought.

Nicholas Clark

Generated at 13:56 on 01 Jul 2004 by mariachi 0.52