On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 08:41:31PM -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 18:08, <stsp_at_apache.org> wrote:
> > Author: stsp
> > Date: Sat Apr 10 22:08:37 2010
> > New Revision: 932796
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=932796&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Add sketchy declarations of functions wrting data to the new conflict store.
> > Review and comments welcome.
> Upon reflection, this approach will cause atomicity problems. The
> ideal situation is to add/replace a node with all of its metadata
> (including conflict data!) in one atomic transation.
> If you look at svn_wc__db_base_add_*(), they have a parameter named
> CONFLICT, which can be inserted during the transaction which
> adds/replaces the node data itself.
> What I would like to suggest is a "conflict builder" set of APIs that
> constructs the svn_skel_t. The operation would be something like this:
> svn_skel_t *conflict = svn_wc__builder_create(result_pool);
> /* conflict == (()), representing (OPERATION) and OPERATION=() */
> SVN_ERR(svn_wc__builder_set_update_op(conflict, base_revision,
> target_revision, result_pool, scratch_pool));
> SVN_ERR(svn_wc__builder_add_text_conflict(conflict, ...));
> SVN_ERR(svn_wc__builder_add_prop_conflict(conflict, ...));
> SVN_ERR(svn_wc__db_base_add_file(..., conflict, ...));
> I don't think we need anything fancier than an svn_skel_t for the
> representation. The builder_set_*_op would just replace the OPERATION
> subskel with the appropriate data. The build_add_* functions would
> append new conflict subskels to the main skel. When everything is
> ready, the main skel is passed into wc_db fully-formed and ready for
> insertion into the database.
> Whatcha think?
I like it.
Received on 2010-04-11 11:04:40 CEST