Re: Comments on Partial Locking -01

[Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net>]

Andy Bierman writes:
>IMO, it is simpler for the agent implementer to tag each
>locked node with just one lock-id, but is not much harder
>to use a Q of lock-id structs, just a lot more memory.

Amen.

Another point of view: when you put complexity in places it will
never be exercised, the likelihood of bugs increases.  So if the
amount of code I have to write to handle a broken app is large
(assuming apps with overlapping locks are likely broken ;^), then
my most broken app writers will be tickling code that never gets
tickled.  And the feedback from such app writers is often limited
to "it doesn't work", making debugging more difficult.

Don't put complexity into corner cases.  KISS.

Thanks,
 Phil

P.s.: Not that my code ever has bugs.....

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>