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 [1]:
> >
> >   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.


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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

notmuch mailing list

Reply via email to