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

Re: svn commit: rev 7695 - in trunk: doc/book subversion/include subversion/libsvn_fs subversion/libsvn_repos subversion/svnadmin subversion/tests/libsvn_fs

From: <kfogel_at_collab.net>
Date: 2003-11-12 21:37:15 CET

Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> > > For example, if deltify r1000 requires creating of a fulltext of r999,
> > > then you'd want to do 1000 *before* deltifying 999.
> >
> > Yeah, I guess sometimes giving the user the flexibility just doesn't
> > pay off in the end.
> I think right now correctness demands that we deltify revisions in
> increasing order, even though that requires doing a lot of redundant
> work. If we want to optimize deltfying multiple revisions, I think that
> requires careful design.

Why would it be a matter of correctness? A deltification should work
no matter what form the base text -- or target, for that matter -- is
stored in before the deltification.

It may be that it does nothing, if (say) the target is already
deltified. Or maybe it fully undeltifies the target and then
redeltifies, which is an awful lot of work... But correctness??

You're scaring me :-).

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 12 22:19:32 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.