Martin Fick <> writes:

> Any thoughts on this idea?  Is it flawed?  I am trying to 
> write it up in a more formal generalized manner and was 
> hoping to get at least one "it seems sane" before I do.

The general impression I have been getting was that this isn't even
worth the effort and the resulting complexity of the code, given
Peff's observations earlier in the thread that ref update conflicts
and leftover locks are reasonably rare in practice.  But perhaps I
has been mis-reading the discussion.

I also have this suspicion that if you really want to shoot for
multi-repository transactions in an massively scaled repository
hosting environment, you would rather want to not rely on hacks
based on filesystem semantics, but instead want to RPC with a
dedicated "ref management service" that knows the transaction
semantics you want, but that could become a much larger change.

I dunno.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to