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

Re: Maintaining NodeID sanity

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-05-12 21:08:55 CEST

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> That confusion would only true on the presumption that people will attempt
> to relate and compare the two txn-ids. I don't believe anybody will do that.
> Thus, you won't have a "semantic confusion", but you'll still end up with
> the "syntactic confusion" (as you termed them).

What I'm more worried about is the copyIDs, because it's easy to fall
into thinking that higher ones must have been committed after lower
ones. Of course, anyone who's done their homework will know
otherwise; but I think there's value in being friendly to those who
haven't done their homework too, since you never know who will need to
track a bug down into the filesystem. (n.b. I'm aware that the point
being questioned was whether or not this is more "friendly", not over
whether being friendly is a Good Thing :-) ).

Heck, txnIDs actually can be ordered reliably by their keys, at least
if you're trying to order which txn was opened first, not which was
committed first. Why anyone would want to do that, I can't imagine

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun May 12 21:10:00 2002

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.