Daniel Shahaf wrote on Sat, 5 Apr 2008 at 17:52 +0300:
> Karl Fogel wrote on Fri, 4 Apr 2008 at 15:37 -0400:
>> Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.co.il> writes:
>>> Pinging myself. The patch below is blocked on the Neon UUID caching
>>> fix Karl suggested. I already wrote that (ra_neon) patch, and will
>>> install Apache today to test it. (I would have installed it in
>>> advance had I known it would be necessary, of course.)
>>
>> Thanks for the heads-up, looking forward to it.
>>
>> -K
>>
>
> Update. During some 'update' operations there are three requests for
> the starting_props (two pre-existing and one added by the patch), but
> not all of them are for the UUID; some of them are for DAV:resourcetype
> or for baseline-relative-path.
>
> I assume these are not safe to cache, since many tests failed when
> I tried to cache (in the session struct) the baseline-relative-path in
> addition to the VCC and UUID. (The VCC is safe to cache: according to
> lgo, ra_serf caches it.)
>
> Therefore, I suppose caching UUID and VCC only will work (that is: will
> prevent round-trips when only the VCC and/or UUID are needed), and I will try
> that next. However, it will not eliminate duplication completely, as
> far as I see.
>
Attached patch to cache only UUID and VCC. It passes all tests except
lock_tests 11, where the 'unlock' fails with a 404. I do not know what
the cause is, yet. Could it be related to the VCC caching?
Daniel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-04-05 20:42:51 CEST