Message161470
| Author | lesha |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Giovanni.Bajo, avian, bobbyi, gregory.p.smith, jcea, lesha, neologix, nirai, pitrou, sbt, sdaoden, vinay.sajip, vstinner |
| Date | 2012-05-23.23:39:43 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1337816384.1.0.986422970832.issue6721@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> So what are you suggesting? That a lock of the default type should > raise an error if you try to acquire it when it has been acquired in a > previous process? I was suggesting a way to make 'logging' fork-safe. No more, no less. Does what my previous comment make sense in light of this? > Using a generation count Sure, that's a good idea. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2012-05-23 23:39:44 | lesha | set | recipients: + lesha, gregory.p.smith, vinay.sajip, jcea, pitrou, vstinner, nirai, bobbyi, neologix, Giovanni.Bajo, sdaoden, sbt, avian |
| 2012-05-23 23:39:44 | lesha | set | messageid: <1337816384.1.0.986422970832.issue6721@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2012-05-23 23:39:43 | lesha | link | issue6721 messages |
| 2012-05-23 23:39:43 | lesha | create | |