Mark Phippard wrote on Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 09:10:31 -0400:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Peter Samuelson <peter_at_p12n.org> wrote:
> > [kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com]
> >> I would love to have revprop packing, but not at the cost of
> >> potentially disabling the use of traditional backup software.
> >> Is there a way to disable fsfs revprop packing, or at least have
> >> it function in an atomic way like the regular rev packing?
> > Hijacking the thread to veer _slightly_ off topic:
> > Why is revprop packing an explicit 'svnadmin pack' operation? If we
> > agree to put revprops in sqlite, why not do that from the start? Just
> > open the shard-specific sqlite file, creating it if necessary, and
> > write the new set of revprops there. No distinction between packed and
> > unpacked revprops, no 'min-unpacked-revprop' file.
> > Was there a good reason not to do it that way?
> Wouldn't the concerns that Kevin has raised kick in if we did this?
> Basically you could not do a safe backup of a repository because if a
> commit happens during the backup we will be writing to the SQLite
For the record, some ways to solve that concern are --
2. take an atomic diks snapshot
3. teach FSFS to pack revision shards without packing revprop shards
4. backup just revprops.db in the SQLite-safe way
(grab an SQLite-level lock, cp(1), release lock)
> Mark Phippard
Received on 2011-07-01 15:23:16 CEST