[PATCH] LMDB full patch set

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Thu, 2018-05-03 at 16:46 +0200, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> Am 03.05.2018 um 07:45 schrieb Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical:
> > On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 17:48 +0200, Stefan Metzmacher wrote:
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > > 
> > > I was also not able to understand if the getpid() based detection for
> > > the fork case correct. What is the correct way for lmdb to cleanup
> > > after fork? Is close(fd) in lmdb_pvt_destructor() really the only
> > > thing? Doesn't lmdb has other state, which we will leak?
> > > 
> > > Thanks for your patience, but there's still a bit of work required,
> > > sorry! But given that will be the core of our AD database careful review
> > > is required.
> > 
> > Is it correct to say that as long as we have the same behaviour, that
> > is either allowing transparent (when not locked) use across a fork(),
> > or denying it for both tdb and mdb, that you are OK with the patches
> > now?
> 
> Likely:-) But I would need to swap it into my brain again...
> 
> > I'm happy with your squashes in general, except around the tests where
> > I need to look much more carefully at what is being done there (it was
> > fairly deliberately constructed, so I need to double-check that).  
> 
> Please check it and maybe already do the squashes.
> 
> > This, and the fork() behaviour aside, are you happy with the tree
> > otherwise? 
> 
> I've lost track, can you rebase the different stages on top of
> master, so that I can see what's actually remaining.
> 
> I'll try to have another look when you give me the pointers to
> rebased branches.

Thanks.  My plan for today (now that I'm past the flapping test) is to
do exactly that, there just wasn't time once I got the LSA thing done. 

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba