On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 08:09:27PM +0200, David Bremner wrote: > W. Trevor King writes: > > Ah, I thought the implicit flush/commit was just in our code. > > Since it's also in the underlying Xapian close, then this patch > > looks pretty good to me. I'd mention Xapian's explicit close in > > the notmuch.h message. Xapain's docs say : > > > > For a WritableDatabase, if a transaction is active it will be > > aborted, while if no transaction is active commit() will be > > implicitly called. > > I'm not sure what you're asking for here by "explicit close". Isn't > what you quote a restatement of > > + * If the caller is currently in an atomic section (there was a > + * notmuch_database_begin_atomic without a matching > + * notmuch_database_end_atomic), this will abort the atomic section, > + * discarding any modifications made in the atomic section. > > in terms of underyling Xapian mechanics?
Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well. The notmuch docs (as of this patch) explain that we don't commit if we're in an atomic block. The Xapian docs also say that, *and* they say that if we're not in atomic block the close *does* try to commit. I think that's worth mentioning in our close docs. Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch