Re: Asynchronous structured exception handling (SEH) in TortoiseProc (/EHa)
Ivan Zhakov <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.version-control.subversion.tortoisesvn.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABw-3Yf8d2TvEw-dneVPGmHznu=RQBj3CPYiiXTqn9+3Q5YJ1g@mail.gmail.com> |
On 25 February 2016 at 22:38, Stefan Kueng <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25.02.2016 10:37, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >>> >>> the log cache is optimized for speed. For example, you can show the log >>> for >>> the whole KDE or Apache repository (including all subproject). Then show >>> the >>> log again and you get *all* entries within about two/three seconds. >>> But for more details, you have to ask Stefan Fuhrmann ;) >> >> >> SQLite is very performant when there's little concurrency (as it is >> with the log caching). I wonder, what was the reason of not using it >> for this purpose and re-implementing everything manually. > > I think one reason was also memory use: if you have the whole log data for > e.g. the Apache repository in memory, that's quite a lot. > SQLite doesn't load the whole DB to memory and could easily handle several gigabytes of data. >> Btw we started to convert some abort() calls in status-fetching code >> to normal errors in Subversion. > > > Finally! > I've asked for this many, many times until I gave up arguing... > :) > >> It took a little bit longer than I expected but as of r27210 log cache >> should gracefully handle most common database corruptions. There are >> still some cases when TortoiseSVN trunk will crash with a corrupted >> log cache, but TortoiseSVN 1.9.3 may also crash in these cases. I'm >> going to fix these edge cases later. > > > I've checked your commits and I agree it's much better now. > Thanks! >> I disabled asynchronous structured exception handling (SEH) in >> TortoiseProc in r27211. >> > > Thanks! > > >> What do you think about backporting these changes to 1.9.x? Changes >> are not small, but they fix real crashes. > > > I think we should wait for about a week: I'd like to have a nightly build in > use here for a while before we merge those changes back. > > And about merging back: would you do that? Not sure which revisions you want > to merge... > Sure, there is no rush for backporting these changes to 1.9.x branch. But it would be nice to get these fixes in 1.9.x branch someday. I think it makes sense to backport all log cache changes, i.e: 27183-27192,27194-27196,27199-27211. These changes merges cleanly to 1.9.x branch. I could do that. -- Ivan Zhakov ------------------------------------------------------ http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=757&dsMessageId=3162973 To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]].