"C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato@collab.net> writes:
> It's not the dump that's the problem. It's the load. If our locks
> table has an auto-incrementing key (like the 'next-id' item in our
> base36 key-using table), and you do this:
>
> lock foo.c
> unlock foo.c
> lock bar.c
>
> You will have used 2 indexes. You dump that repos (which has one lock
> in it, for bar.c), you load into another one. Now, either you have to
> tell your database backed "Turn off your auto-incrementer, because I'm
> dictating keys to you" or you have to deal with the fact that the one
> lock in your dump is only gonna use 1 index in your repos, which means
> that it will get a different UID than it had before the dump.
Huh? No, you only have to increment the target repository's index to
the higher of the two repository's auto-incremented next-id fields.
And bar.c keeps its original lock token, of course.
I'm not sure I understood your paragraph correctly though. Say it
less tersely?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 22 21:05:06 2004