Re: [PATCHv3 4/6] receive-pack.c: use a single ref_transaction for atomic pushes

2014-12-18 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefan Beller sbel...@google.com writes: This would change the current behavior. In the case of !atomic we want to consider all commands and not stop early. Quite right. So maybe more if (!cmd-error_string) { if (!use_atomic ref_transaction_commit(...)) {

[PATCHv3 4/6] receive-pack.c: use a single ref_transaction for atomic pushes

2014-12-17 Thread Stefan Beller
From: Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com Update receive-pack to use an atomic transaction iff the client negotiated that it wanted atomic-push. This leaves the default behavior to be the old non-atomic one ref at a time update. This is to cause as little disruption as possible to existing

Re: [PATCHv3 4/6] receive-pack.c: use a single ref_transaction for atomic pushes

2014-12-17 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefan Beller sbel...@google.com writes: @@ -1086,8 +1100,25 @@ static void execute_commands(struct command *commands, if (cmd-skip_update) continue; - + if (!use_atomic) { + transaction = ref_transaction_begin(err); +

Re: [PATCHv3 4/6] receive-pack.c: use a single ref_transaction for atomic pushes

2014-12-17 Thread Stefan Beller
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Stefan Beller sbel...@google.com writes: @@ -1086,8 +1100,25 @@ static void execute_commands(struct command *commands, if (cmd-skip_update) continue; - + if