Re: [PATCH 1/3] wt-status: implement opportunisitc index update correctly

Paul Tan [off-list ref] writes:

Hmm, to add on, looking at the three other call sites of this
function, two of them (builtin/commit.c and builtin/describe.c)
basically do:

    if (0 <= fd)
        update_index_if_able(...)

with that 0 <= fd conditional. With this patch it becomes three out of
four.

The other one is diff.c::refresh_index_quietly() that you are not
counting, I think, but if you look at it again, it also is not
called after hold_locked_index() fails to acquire the lock, so with
this fix everybody refrains from calling it when it does not hold
the lock.

Perhaps the repeated use of this conditional is a sign that the
0 <= fd check could be built into update_index_if_able()?

That condition is "do we have the lock?  Otherwise we are not even
allowed to update it", so in that sense it may make sense.

I think there is precedent for building in these kind of checks --
rollback_lock_file() also does not fail if the lock file was not
successfully opened.

That said, the number of call sites is quite low so it's probably not
worth doing this.

Yeah, I can go either way.  At least with the change things are
consistent.