After some discussion with Stefan-

> 1) ODB locking appears to be sound...
> 2) ODB locking is "unfair"

Stefan reminded me that "priority boosting" is the standard solution for this
problem. Since Linux does not appear to implement this, we may try doing it inside
midas, time permitting. "Fairness" behaviour of Win32, BSD and MacOSX may be worth
investigating.

> 3) presently, we use an infinite timeout waiting for the ODB lock.

I will add a timeout of 10 minutes, then shutdown the ODB client with an error message.

> 4) in db_{lock,unlock}_database(), [there is no] race condition against the
"lock_cnt" variable [because it is local].

I will document this.

> 5) I found a failure mode where db_close_database() erroneously deletes the
> lock semaphore. Once the semaphore is deleted, ODB locking silently fails
> (in db_lock_database() we do not check for success status of
> mutex_wait_for()) and remaining ODB clients operate without locking protection.

I will add a check and shutdown the ODB client with an error message if the lock
cannot be obtained (the mutex was deleted, the "lock" system call returns an error,
etc).

> [how to decide when the last ODB client disconnected from the shared memory and
when to delete the lock semaphore?]

We considered using a counting semaphore to count active ODB clients, if counting
semaphores do the right things on all supported systems (Linux, Win32, MacOSX).

K.O.