Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > So I wanted to know whether there were any code paths that failed to do > so, and just blindly rely on the lazy-open. Finding the races is > inherently hard, because you only catch them when somebody else is doing > a repack. But if we just _remove_ the lazy-load, then it becomes easy to > catch anybody relying on it. Like: > ... Clever; I like it. > In such a case, we are relying on the lazy-load (and we _are_ racy!). > But the patch above would punish people on low-descriptor systems. It's > better to have an unlikely race and complete the request than to fail > consistently. :-/ > > For people who are running high-traffic servers, they just need to make > sure their file descriptor limit is reasonably high to avoid the race. Thanks for an illuminating backstory for the patch.