[LDB] Simplify ldb_wait()
simo at samba.org
Mon Nov 12 07:50:06 GMT 2007
On Mon, 2007-11-12 at 08:32 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 12:33 -0500, simo wrote:
> > Why have you changed the ldb_wait() prototype from getting an handle to
> > get a full request?
> > It seem that the new ldab_wait() never uses req at all except as in
> > req->handle.
> Because nobody passed ldb_wait anything by req->handle. It also could
> allow the handle to be replaced, which would allow modules to simplify
> their tail (and avoid the full blocking that currently occurs, even when
> the module is just dealing with it's final operation).
I think I decided to pass the handle and not the request intentionally,
right now I can't remember why. I think manipulation of the request from
modules may have been one reason, ie *avoid* making it possible to
change the handle you are waiting for. but memory is not good I might be
> > It seem to me an unnecessary ABI change for ldb.
> Are we seriously keeping an ABI on ldb yet?
No but I want to keep API (not ABI) changes to a minimum, and avoid
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat Inc. <ssorce at redhat.com>
More information about the samba-technical