Re: (ITS#5329) back-ldif deadlock

[h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no]

I wrote:
> Assuming the acl call should be there, one simple fix could be to
> introduce a 'li_wlock' mutex, lock it early on LDAP update operations,
> and delay locking li_rdwr until the operation is about to update
> the database.

That does affect scheduling: Incoming read operations bypass pending
write operations that are waiting for another write operation.
(Since write but not read operations lock li_wlock before li_rdwr.)
Looks acceptable to me, back-ldif doesn't exist for max performance.

-- 
Hallvard