ctdb shortcut locking

[tridge at samba.org]

Volker,

 > For my taste this too much depends on the order in which the
 > SETLKW requests are replied. Under Linux it seems that new
 > requests are added to the end of the queue. But I don't feel
 > good to count on this for all Unixes. From the docs I've
 > looked at I did not see a guaranteed ordering on who wins
 > the SETLKW race.

If that were a problem, then wouldn't it also be a problem right now
with normal tdb and non-clustered Samba? If the OS didn't queue locks
in order then a smbd could be stuck forever waiting for a lock on a
busy record.

Cheers, Tridge