Closes https://github.com/datalad/datalad/issues/1020
The use of runWriter in scanUnlockedFiles broke due to this change;
it failed with blocked indefinitely in mvar, because the database write
handle was taken while linkFromAnnex needed to also write to it (to update
the inode cache). So, switched to using a separate runWriter for each call
to addAssociatedFileFast. A little less efficient, but not greatly; the
writes should all still be cached.
In the case where the pointer file is in place, and not the content
of the object, lock's performNew was called with filemodified=True,
which caused it to try to repopulate the object from an unmodified
associated file, of which there were none. So, the content of the object
got thrown away incorrectly. This was the cause (although not the root
cause) of data loss in https://github.com/datalad/datalad/issues/1020
The same problem could also occur when the work tree file is modified,
but the object is not, and lock is called with --force. Added a test case
for this, since it's excercising the same code path and is easier to set up
than the problem above.
Note that this only occurred when the keys database did not have an inode
cache recorded for the annex object. Normally, the annex object would be in
there, but there are of course circumstances where the inode cache is out
of sync with reality, since it's only a cache.
Fixed by checking if the object is unmodified; if so we don't need to
try to repopulate it. This does add an additional checksum to the unlock
path, but it's already checksumming the worktree file in another case,
so it doesn't slow it down overall.
Further investigation found a similar problem occurred when smudge --clean
is called on a file and the inode cache is not populated. cleanOldKeys
deleted the unmodified old object file in this case. This was also
fixed by checking if the object is unmodified.
In general, use of getInodeCaches and sameInodeCache is potentially
dangerous if the inode cache has not gotten populated for some reason.
Better to use isUnmodified. I breifly auited other places that check the
inode cache, and did not see any immediate problems, but it would be easy
to miss this kind of problem.
When adding a tree like a/b/c/d when a/b already exists, fixes the bug that
the tree that got created was a/b/a/b/c/d
Just need to flatten out the top N directories of the tree that's being
grafted in, so we get the c/d part. This was complicated by the Tree
data type being a rose tree rather than a regular tree.
This commit was sponsored by Nick Daly on Patreon.
The modification flag was not being set when making modifications deep
in a tree, so parent trees were not updated to contain the modified tree.
Seems to have exposed another bug where the wrong filename gets grafted in.
This commit was sponsored by Brock Spratlen on Patreon.
