On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 04:49:53PM -0800, Dave_Thomas mailing lists wrote:
> On 12/7/06, Daniel Rall <email@example.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 07 Dec 2006, David Glasser wrote:
> >> Well, actually, 1.4 did allow for a new repository format (to use
> >> the compressed svndiff version), but it doesn't require you to
> >> upgrade your repository and still allows you to make the old
> >> version.
> >Dave (Thomas), the repository format hasn't changed (yet) for 1.5. If
> >the merge-tracking branch makes it in (which is quite possible), the
> >format will change, as we'll probably be including an sqlite index
> >alongside the FSFS or BDB data files to track merge history.
> Ok. So hopefully if we stick to FSFS, we'll be safe.
Just to make sure this is clear: it's likely that 1.5 will introduce a
SQLite index to FSFS alongside the existing structure. Currently, the
merge tracking code also uses a SQLite alongside the BDB structure
(though I don't know if there are any plans to move to a native BDB data
structure for the latter - Dan?).
Either way, the merge index is going to be added to both filesystem
types, which is what I wanted to make clear. I'm not entirely sure
whether we'll be revving the filesystem format number, though (Dan?).
Incidentally, I imagine that SVNKit will have some difficulty in making
use of the SQLite database. There appears to be a JDBC wrapper for
SQLite, though it uses JNI to call into SQLite itself rather than being
a pure Java solution. Technically that won't matter to you if you're
just reading the repository (since that part hasn't changed), though it
might mean that SVNKit won't support 1.5 repositories as soon as it
Received on Fri Dec 8 19:33:53 2006
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored