On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Blair Zajac wrote:
> Daniel Rall wrote:
> >On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Blair Zajac wrote:
> >>What should we call this new function, since svn_fs_type is already
> >>taken? svn_fs_backend_type? I wouldn't want to use svn_fs_fs_type
> >>since that sounds like an fsfs related function.
> >I wouldn't introduce a new API, but instead cache the type in a field
> >in the svn_fs_t structure, and avoid I/O when svn_fs_type() is called
> >on a svn_fs_t which already has the value filled in for its type field.
> But svn_fs_type() takes a char *, not a svn_fs_t * as an argument.
> svn_error_t *svn_fs_type(const char **fs_type, const char *path,
> apr_pool_t *pool);
> So even if you had an svn_fs_t, you have to get the original path to the
> repository and pass it here.
> Agreed that caching the type is a good idea.
Bleh. (Sorry I didn't look at the API again this mornin'.)
We could introduce something like:
svn_error_t *svn_fs_type2(const char **fs_type, const svn_fs_t *fs,
Received on Thu Jun 14 17:58:00 2007
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored