Right now, the wc_db stores 'depth' and 'translated_size' for the
working copy. Those are entirely client-side values (there may be
more; those two are just off the top of my head). I'd already noticed
the "weirdness" of our schema holding these two concepts. Supporting a
more general "client-side only" property store might be an interesting
way to deal with those values, with wcprops, and to support
third-party clients.
I'll jot down a note about this, and let it percolate for a bit...
Cheers,
-g
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 13:14, David Glasser <glasser_at_davidglasser.net> wrote:
> It wouldn't be a bad idea for wcng to provide an API for arbitrary programs
> to store some key-value pairs in the wc, namespaced (either explicitly by a
> third arg or implicitly in the key) by program. gvn really would have wanted
> that, say. So you would just use this general storage in the svn:dav1:
> namespace or something for the old wcprops.
>
> --dave
>
> On Mar 18, 2009 10:19 PM, "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>
> Hyrum K. Wright wrote: > Greg, > It appears that the currently failing tests
> on trunk over ra_neon a...
>
> Not sure if this helps you to decide or not, but the current WC
> implementation has two different property stores, one for regular versioned
> properties (which has both BASE and WORKING), one for wcprops (which has ...
> neither, really). The wc-props abstraction isn't strictly required going
> forward, but when talking to pre-HTTP-v2 servers, the absence of wc-props
> has the potential to vastly slow things down.
>
> (There's a third concept called "entry props", but these find their storage
> as fields in the svn_wc_entry_t.)
>
> --
> C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1353462
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1355706
Received on 2009-03-19 15:38:44 CET