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

Re: Bug in svnrdump (trunk@1085375) -- malformed dump file with multiple properties

From: Daniel Shahaf <danielsh_at_elego.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:13:26 +0200

I've taken a shot at a regression test in r1086497.

However, I think we may have a larger problem here:

The svn_delta_editor_t API allows change_dir_prop() calls to be
transmitted only after all directory-children of a directory have been
transmitted [1]. How can we generate a dumpfile given that input?

On the one hand, we don't want to buffer entire subtrees rooted in D
while we're waiting for D's properties.

On the other hand, can we dump the properties of D only after dumping
the entire subtree rooted in D?

I expect the 'svnadmin load parser to want to see an entry for D before
seeing an entry for any of its children. Which, yes, leaves the option
to dump first a skeleton entry for D, then dump D's subtree, and finally
dump *another* "Node-path: D" entry --- but that smells ugly, if not in
outright violation of the dumpfile format.

Thoughts?

Daniel

[1]
 * 4. A producer must call @c change_dir_prop on a directory either
 * before opening any of the directory's subdirs or after closing
 * them, but not in the middle.

neil.winton_at_bt.com wrote on Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 13:26:46 +0100:
> On 25 March 2011 at 19:19, Hyrum K Wright wrote
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:11 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> >> On 03/25/2011 11:31 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> >>> Neil,
> >>> Thanks for the report.  In attempting to reproduce, I wasn't even able
> >>> to get as far as comparing the dumpfiles, as svnrdump asserted
> >>> somewhere in the process.  I opened issue 3844[1] to track this bug,
> >>> and committed an XFailing test in r1085428.  I also marked the issue
> >>> as important for a 1.7.0 release.
> >>>
> >>> -Hyrum
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3844
> >>
> >> See r1085523.
> >
> > Thanks, Mike.
> >
> > Neil, when you get a chance, could you test a r1085523 and see if it
> > fixes your problem?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -Hyrum
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Sorry, but no cigar :( This probably fixes the assertion found by Hyrum, but doesn't address the original issue. The current test case added to the test suite addresses loading multiple propedits. That's good, but it's not sufficient. The heart of the issue is that a transaction with multiple propedits to a single path is *dumped* incorrectly. So for an original dump representation like this:
>
> ---
> Node-path:
> Node-kind: dir
> Node-action: change
> Prop-content-length: 42
> Content-length: 42
>
> K 3
> foo
> V 3
> bar
> K 3
> bar
> V 3
> baz
> PROPS-END
> ---
>
> The svnrdump output for the same transaction comes out like this:
>
> ---
> Node-path:
> Node-kind: dir
> Node-action: change
> Prop-delta: true
> Prop-content-length: 26
> Content-length: 26
>
> K 3
> foo
> V 3
> bar
> PROPS-END
>
>
> Prop-delta: true
> Prop-content-length: 26
> Content-length: 26
>
> K 3
> bar
> V 3
> baz
> PROPS-END
> ---
>
> Note the second "orphaned" prop-delta.
>
> It would be great if svnrdump produced exactly the same output as svnadmin (it'd make the test assertions nice and easy), but from a bit of experimentation (I haven't read the svnadmin code here) I don't believe that it's necessary for the two prop-deltas actually to be merged for the dumpfile to be valid. So if it's easier to repeat the preceding node-path information for each prop-delta then I guess that would be OK, as long as the net result is the same.
>
> Thanks,
> Neil
Received on 2011-03-29 12:19:14 CEST

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