Re: A forward-thinking thought about deltas in FS design
From: Brad Appleton <brad_at_bradapp.net>
Date: 2003-07-06 06:09:30 CEST
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 04:40:19AM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
Is this the same thing as the interleaved (or "inline", or sometimes called "interlaced") delta approach that is used by ClearCase and SCCS (among others?). It works basically like a great big bunch of "#ifdefs" for each delta. If not, can you say more about how it differs from the inline delta approach?
I think the inline approach makes it easier than the reverse-delta (or RCS style with reverse-deltas on the main trunk and forward-delta on branches) when it comes down to doing merge-algebra in an intelligent fashion.
> Cons:
Once upon a time, back in the mid-80s I worked on a commercial VC tool called SVM (Seidl Version Manager). Where were one of the few VC tools for the PC (other main ones being PVCS, TLIB, and a relative newcomer named MKS ;-). Ours was the only one of that bunch that used forward-deltas. We overcame the performance issue by keeping a cache of the most recent N versions in a cache area (where N could be configured per system, as could the set of files for which to keep the cache - if I recall correctly anyway :)
> * Balancing space and time is harder for the all-important first few
-- Brad Appleton <brad@bradapp.net> www.bradapp.net Software CM Patterns (www.scmpatterns.com) Effective Teamwork, Practical Integration "And miles to go before I sleep." -- Robert Frost --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.orgReceived on Sun Jul 6 06:10:34 2003 |
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.