[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Minimizing the `revisions' table.

From: <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: 2002-06-14 17:59:41 CEST

While talking about the whole "changed paths being stored as a
revision property" thing with Ben and Karl, a thought occured to me
that I think is utter goodness.

Currently, our revisions table stores:

   - a "revision" header
   - the root node revision id for the tree in that revision
   - a property list
   - a transaction id (key into the `transactions' table)

Our transaction table stores two different types of records. An
uncommitted transaction has:

   - a "transaction" header
   - the root note revision id for the tree in that transaction
   - the root node revision id for the tree in the revision on which its based
   - a property list
   - a list of copy ids for copies made during the transaction

Committed trasactions have:

   - a "committed" header
   - the revision that was created by committing the transaction

Committed transactions are basically just key maps from the
transactions table to the revisions table. But note the amount of
overlap in uncommitted transactions and revisions.

--
Here's what I'm proposing:
REVISION:
   - a "revision" header
   - a transaction id (key into the `transactions' table)
UNFINISHED TRANSACTION:
   - a "transaction" header
   - the root note revision id for the tree in that transaction
   - the root node revision id for the tree in the revision on which its based
   - a transaction property list
   - paths that were changed in this transaction
   - a list of copy ids for copies made during the transaction
COMMITTED TRANSACTION:
   - a "committed" header
   - the root node revision id for the tree that was committed
   - a revision property list
   - paths that were changed in this revision
   - the revision that was created by committing the transaction
--
Why?  Well, at commit time, we currently copy all the txn properties
into the new revision-to-be, and if we do the paths-changed stuff,
we'll be copying those as well.  It just makes more sense (and wastes
fewer fields in the svn_fs__transaction_t structure) to keep this kind
of information in the transactions table, and make Revisions have the
really small key-map.
Thots?  I'm betting that Bill Tutt and Brane are +1, yes?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jun 14 18:02:04 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.