On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 09:08:10AM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> Yes, this TDB uses transactions to ensure the updates are safe
> (inherited from gd's conversion of this functionality from ldb, which
> used transactions). I guess that now that it is CLEAR_IF_FIRST then we
> could use normal tdb locking rather than needing the lock out the whole
> DB for exclusive access.
Ahh, thanks, I had missed the tdb_transaction_start call.
> I would however like to leave that for a subsequent patch, if that's OK.
> (We would need all of this change anyway, and I need to carefully
> consider the required semantics).
Ok, true. It would be good then to remove the TDB_NOSYNC
flag from the open call. This is a bit confusing then :-)
I am fine with those patches.