From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 177266DE020D for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 13:34:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.189 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.189 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.566, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.103, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a_YrTmgYDpF9 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 13:34:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (guru.guru-group.fi [46.183.73.34]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A09386DE01CA for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 13:34:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by guru.guru-group.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819F71000CA; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:30:34 +0200 (EET) From: Tomi Ollila To: David Bremner , Eric J , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Lost updates to Notmuch database In-Reply-To: <871t8avnhq.fsf@zancas.localnet> References: <337393ce5e2484d64f837a44b2c4f2ea32f91295-NM@bruno.deptj.eu> <871t8avnhq.fsf@zancas.localnet> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+70~g0bc8909 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: HhBM'cA~ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 21:34:58 -0000 On Thu, Feb 18 2016, David Bremner wrote: > Eric J writes: > >> However, if I do it twice, in different processes, at the same time, one >> file is added and tagged properly, the other is not (totally unfindable >> by notmuch search). Neither process reports any error, and they both log >> their actions normally. Actually a third simultaneous process also fails >> to leave any result in the database. > > It should be impossible for more than one process to open a Xapian > database for writing at the same time. So if the processes are really > running in parallel, you should be getting error codes from the later > calls to notmuch_database_open{_verbose}. You claim that's not > happening, which is puzzling. Maybe you can try to duplicate your > problem with a tiny C program. In addition to that (or even before), you could 1) be able to reproduce the problem 2) try to reproduce it prefixing the command with ltrace -tt 3) examine carefully the ltrace logs to figure out where the proble lies Tomi Hmm, Interestingly when I run LD_LIBRARY_PATH=~/vc/ext/notmuch/lib ltrace -f -tt ~/vc/ext/notmuch/notmuch-shared new I did not see any Xapian references, but when I did ltrace -f -tt ~/vc/ext/notmuch/notmuch new I did. Interestingly when using libnotmuch.so.4 the xapian interface is hidden (is it baked inside ~/vc/ext/notmuch/lib/libnotmuch.so.4.3.0 :O)