Signed-off-by: Melanie <melanie@t-data.com>
This patch also fixes a large amount of trailing whitespace. While this is
beneficial, it should really be in a separate patch that fixes whitespace only.
Just good practice.
* Hopefully this will enable mac people to use SQLite again
* Someone cooler then me will need to figure out how to define CSharpSqlite with Mono so the conditional will pick up.
* There's also an error that occurs when you first load OpenSimulator under CSharpSQLite that goes away after.
* The databases are not byte for byte compatible. Mono.Data.Sqlite is able to read CSharpSqlite made databases but not the reverse way.
* Use a conditional define to determine whether we're using CSharpSqlite or Mono.Data.Sqlite
#if CSharpSqlite
using Community.CsharpSqlite.Sqlite;
#else
using Mono.Data.Sqlite;
#endif
* Hopefully, this will restore sqlite functionality on a Mac. In visual studio, you can edit the OpenSim.Data.SQLite project, go to the Build tab and enter CSharpSqlite in the box. I'm not sure how to define CSharpSqlite in Mono, someone better at it then me will have to take the job of figuring out the best way to define it in Mono.
The separate remove and set operations is SOG.set_UUID() are both locked under m_parts.SyncRoot since they are logically atomic (though this isn't such an issue if the SOG isn't part of a scene)
Added unit test for this behaviour.
Also changed the second m_parts.AddOrReplace() to m_parts.Add(). As the old reference is now removed we never end up replacing an identical uuid. And if we replace a uuid that's already there (from a child part) then this is an error.
When running for the first time, people see migration failures because of sql statements that are trying to move data from old tables (e.g. users). The amended text attempts to calm their nerves.
* Added MundaneFrameworkTests.cs for the really mundane tests like testing properties,constructors, etc in OpenSim.Framework.
* Fixed LeftAxis and UpAxis unpacking from OSD to AgentPosition (copy and paste error caught while writing mundane test) (Good thing nobody uses the camera frustum from remote regions yet)
Object updates are sent on the task queue. It's possible for an object update to be placed on the client queue before a kill packet comes along.
The kill packet would then be placed on the state queue and possibly get sent before the update
If the update gets sent afterwards then client get undeletable no owner objects until relog
Placing the kills in the task queue should mean that they are received after updates. The kill record prevents subsequent updates getting on the queue
Comments state that updates are sent via the state queue but this isn't true. If this was the case this problem might not exist.
This is necessary because it was still possible for an entity update packet to be constructed, the thread to pause, a kill to be sent on another thread, and then the original thread to resume and send the update
This would result in an update being received after a kill, which results in undeletable ghost objects until the viewer is relogged
Extending the lock looks okay since its only taken by kill, update and reprioritize, and both kill and update do not take further locks
However, evidence suggests that there is still a kill/update race somewhere
BlueWall