more todo
This commit is contained in:
parent
f7be2e9d37
commit
9df9a3f82b
1 changed files with 20 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -10,6 +10,26 @@ this.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## implementation notes
|
## implementation notes
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* startExport uses checkPresentExport, but when there's a modified file,
|
||||||
|
it's not unexported, so it present, so checkPresentExport succeeds,
|
||||||
|
and so startExport does the wrong thing. Seems to indicate checkPresentExport
|
||||||
|
needs to be replaced too.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Is renameExport safe to use with an import?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
When a rename() is done, it could result in a modified file being
|
||||||
|
renamed. But this would not result in data loss; the next import would
|
||||||
|
see the modification and import it from the new name. The only
|
||||||
|
potentially confusing thing is that there was essentially a conflict, and
|
||||||
|
it got resolved in a way the user may not expect.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
But.. S3 implements rename as a copy followed by a
|
||||||
|
delete. But if there's a race, that means that the modified content does
|
||||||
|
get deleted.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
So, it seems it's not safe.
|
||||||
|
Probably simplest to just make it not be provided for import remotes.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* Should the ContentIdentifier db be multiwriter? It would simplify
|
* Should the ContentIdentifier db be multiwriter? It would simplify
|
||||||
the situation with the long-lived lock of it in adjustExportImport
|
the situation with the long-lived lock of it in adjustExportImport
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue