r6560: added a tdb_chainlock_read() call in ldb_search(). This guarantees

that ldb_search() sees a single consistent view of the database (by
blocking writes during a ldb_search)
(This used to be commit 917f2a8a073fd501f0626bea4f9deb91b95fdc90)

1 files changed, 34 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/source4/lib/ldb/ldb_tdb/ldb_tdb.c b/source4/lib/ldb/ldb_tdb/ldb_tdb.c
index 87582cf4eb..b47d79de52 100644
--- a/source4/lib/ldb/ldb_tdb/ldb_tdb.c
+++ b/source4/lib/ldb/ldb_tdb/ldb_tdb.c
@@ -249,6 +249,40 @@ static int ltdb_unlock(struct ldb_module *module, const char *lockname)
 
 
 /*
+  lock the database for read - use by ltdb_search
+*/
+int ltdb_lock_read(struct ldb_module *module)
+{
+	struct ltdb_private *ltdb = module->private_data;
+	TDB_DATA key;
+	int ret;
+	key = ltdb_key(module, LDBLOCK);
+	if (!key.dptr) {
+		return -1;
+	}
+	ret = tdb_chainlock_read(ltdb->tdb, key);
+	talloc_free(key.dptr);
+	return ret;
+}
+
+/*
+  unlock the database after a ltdb_lock_read()
+*/
+int ltdb_unlock_read(struct ldb_module *module)
+{
+	struct ltdb_private *ltdb = module->private_data;
+	TDB_DATA key;
+	key = ltdb_key(module, LDBLOCK);
+	if (!key.dptr) {
+		return -1;
+	}
+	tdb_chainunlock_read(ltdb->tdb, key);
+	talloc_free(key.dptr);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+
+/*
   we've made a modification to a dn - possibly reindex and 
   update sequence number
 */