Re: [PATCH v8 19/44] refs.c: change update_ref to use a transaction
From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:01:11
Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Change the update_ref helper function to use a ref transaction internally. Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <redacted> --- refs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c index 6e5e940..0476892 100644 --- a/refs.c +++ b/refs.c@@ -3416,11 +3416,28 @@ int update_ref(const char *action, const char *refname, const unsigned char *sha1, const unsigned char *oldval, int flags, enum action_on_err onerr) { - struct ref_lock *lock; - lock = update_ref_lock(refname, oldval, flags, NULL, onerr); - if (!lock) + struct ref_transaction *t; + struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT; + + t = ref_transaction_begin(); + if ((!t || + ref_transaction_update(t, refname, sha1, oldval, flags, + !!oldval)) || + (ref_transaction_commit(t, action, &err) && !(t = NULL))) { + const char *str = "update_ref failed for ref '%s': %s"; + + ref_transaction_rollback(t); + switch (onerr) { + case UPDATE_REFS_MSG_ON_ERR: + error(str, refname, err.buf); break; + case UPDATE_REFS_DIE_ON_ERR: + die(str, refname, err.buf); break; + case UPDATE_REFS_QUIET_ON_ERR: break; + }
The error string already contains the refname, so it would make sense to
do
case UPDATE_REFS_MSG_ON_ERR:
error("%s", err.buf); break;
etc here.
It occurs to me now that if ref_transaction_begin fails, presumably
the error string would not contain the refname. I want to say that
the refname wouldn't help much in diagnosing or recovering from the
problem in that case so it would still be okay to just do error("%s",
err.buf). What do you think?
Thanks,
Jonathan