[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: svn commit: r997854 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: wc-queries.sql wc_db.c

From: Bert Huijben <bert_at_qqmail.nl>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:54:29 +0200

> -----Original Message-----
> From: philip_at_apache.org [mailto:philip_at_apache.org]
> Sent: donderdag 16 september 2010 19:25
> To: commits_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r997854 - in
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: wc-queries.sql wc_db.c
>
> Author: philip
> Date: Thu Sep 16 17:24:47 2010
> New Revision: 997854
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=997854&view=rev
> Log:
> Convert another query for SVN_WC__NODES.
>
> * subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql
> (STMT_UPDATE_COPYFROM_TO_INHERIT_1): New.
>
> * subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c
> (svn_wc__db_temp_elide_copyfrom): Operate on NODES table as well.
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql
> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc_db.c
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-
> queries.sql?rev=997854&r1=997853&r2=997854&view=diff
> =======================================================================
> =======
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql Thu Sep 16
> 17:24:47 2010
> @@ -629,6 +629,17 @@ UPDATE WORKING_NODE SET
> copyfrom_revnum = null
> WHERE wc_id = ?1 AND local_relpath = ?2;
>
> +-- STMT_UPDATE_COPYFROM_TO_INHERIT_1
> +UPDATE NODES SET
> + repos_id = null,
> + repos_path = null,
> + revision = null
> +WHERE wc_id = ?1 AND local_relpath = ?2
> + AND op_depth IN (SELECT op_depth FROM nodes
> + WHERE wc_id = ?1 AND local_relpath = ?2
> + ORDER BY op_depth DESC
> + LIMIT 1);

Can you add some marker somewhere that this is just temporary behavior?
(Probably in wc_db.c)

The final code should (of course) make the op_depth of the NODES record match the op_depth of the inherited operation and not just update some information on the highest op_depth version of the node itself.

The update behavior op_depth should be explicit instead of just taking the highest current op_depth. (Updating the highest existing op_depth doesn't verify if the node is deleted/replaced (where you can still elide lower layers) or maybe just a base_node (error in caller))

        Bert
Received on 2010-09-16 19:56:40 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.