On Jul 19 20:53, jojelino wrote: > On 2013-07-19 PM 8:30, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >A valid testcase would help a lot, though. What you meant to do > >was calling flock with LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB. > > > that's what exactly sqlite3 that uses the mandatory-locking did. > reproducing the behavior was i meant to do. > >And then again, your testcase works as designed. Not by me, but by > >Microsoft. You can't overwrite an existing lock, even if hold by the > >same file handle. See http://cygwin.com/cygwin-api/std-notes.html > > > Yes. the testcase works without mandatory locking. so i hope next > sqlite3 release doesn't use mandatory locking feature of cygwin. > someone who have plenty of time to waste digging into sqlite3 source > code would come with workaround to the problem.
There *is* a workaround: export CYGWIN_SQLITE_LOCKING=posix See http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2013-06/msg00014.html Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
