From 42f8e09d07e9a384d17a675a20117677600eb0f5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rainer Gerhards Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:12:35 +0000 Subject: removed TODO that was long implemented --- queue.c | 13 ------------- 1 file changed, 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/queue.c b/queue.c index 28dd1f33..fa896437 100644 --- a/queue.c +++ b/queue.c @@ -1188,19 +1188,6 @@ static rsRetVal queueShutdownWorkers(queue_t *pThis) } - /* TODO: - * If we cancelled some regular workers above, we need to think about where any "ungotten()" pUsr - * data elements need to go to. We need to make sure they are persisted. But this will be kept open - * until we finally code that part of the logic. - * To provide an early idea: the ungetObj() call should be a pointer. If running DA, it shall point - * to the DA queues ungetObj() and if we are running regular, it should point to the parent queues. The - * idea behind that logic is that if something is to be ungotten, it should normally go back to the top - * of the queue, which in that case is inside the DA queue... - but that idea needs to be verified once - * we reached that point. - * rgerhards, 2008-01-27 - */ - - /* TODO: think: do we really need to do this here? Can't it happen on DA queue destruction? If we * disable it, we get an assertion... I think this is OK, as we need to have a certain order and * canceling the DA workers here ensures that order. But in any instant, we may have a look at this -- cgit