Extras build failures...

[Dan Williams]

On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 12:31 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 08:11 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> > I think we should bump up the timeout here, actually.  It's not a
> > problem on the builders, but an issue with the server and Extras
> > release scripts. 
> 
> Can't we just fix the locking? Surely we don't need to lock the repo for
> the _whole_ period of the upload. You can upload the new packages, then
> lock, then create metadata, then unlock. You don't need it locked for
> more than the few seconds it takes to update the metadata for the new
> packages, surely?

The Extras push scripts have apparently been optimized to copy stuff
too, unlock, then delete, or something like that, so the locked period
is now shorter.  But we can't get away from locking; the builders can't
start building the mock chroots while the repodata is getting updated on
the server.

Though, I just thought of a few optimizations to take.  Previously I'd
been making really conservative approaches to this, but I think we only
need to lock the repo on the server while the repodata is regenerated,
not for the whole copy + repodata process.  But that likely only saves a
few seconds on a box with fast storage.

Dan