statdaemon extension

[Martin Geisler]

Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> writes:

> So even if the daemon can say that it has processed all events it was
> notified about, then we still don't know if there is an event "on the
> way". The gap should be really small, but I expect it to be there.

I have an idea for handling this: *assuming* the OS will deliver
filesystem events in order, then it would be enough to create an
additional event when status starts and then wait until this event is
seen by the daemon -- that will ensure that the daemon has seen all
filesystem events that occured before status was called.

I've implemented this for the Windows backend and it seems to work fine,
that is, I don't see any change in behavior or performance. The code is
still here if anybody want to test it:

  https://bitbucket.org/aragost/statdaemon

I don't know if the assumption above is valid or not -- if anybody here
is an expert on MS filesystems, then please speak up :)

-- 
Martin Geisler

aragost Trifork
Commercial Mercurial support
http://aragost.com/mercurial/