On 29 December 2014 at 17:39, Stefan Fuhrmann <stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kot...@visualsvn.com> > wrote: >> >> Stefan Fuhrmann <stef...@apache.org> writes: >> [...] >> >> libsvn_fs-1.dll!get_node_revision_body() >> libsvn_fs-1.dll!svn_fs_fs__dag_get_node() >> libsvn_fs-1.dll!open_path() >> libsvn_fs-1.dll!svn_fs_fs__node_id() >> libsvn_fs-1.dll!svn_fs_fs__check_path() >> mod_dav_svn.so!prep_regular() >> mod_dav_svn.so!get_resource() >> mod_dav.so!dav_get_resource() >> mod_dav.so!dav_method_get() >> ... >> >> Given the above, I am -1 on doing this. Please revert this change and >> other >> related changes that were supposed to fix the problem. > > > I will keep the added sub-pools in place for now. The problems > they cause now will always occur when we move code to the > two-pool paradigm. The DAG cache issue is simply the trigger > to tighten our pool usage in FSFS. > Stefan,
Do I understand correctly that you're basically going to ignore this veto? -- Ivan Zhakov
