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

Re: question for FSFS gurus (was: Re: FSFS successor ID design draft)

From: Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 12:12:31 +0200

On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 01:57:51PM +0400, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> No, I think that auto-resolving tree-conflicts involving moves is most
> important task for Subversion 1.8. But I feel it could be implemented
> without implementing FSFS successor ID storage. It seems that
> algorithm that you posted could be reversed.

I have caused some confusion here, sorry.
Contrary to how I initially presented it, That algorithm has *nothing*
to do with successor IDs.

Please see this post where I corrected my mistake:
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-08/0624.shtml

> Anyway we can implement top-level part of handling moves and then
> optimize it using FSFS successor ID storage or something else.

We need the bottom parts first.
It won't perform well enough without successor-IDs.
Received on 2011-09-05 12:13:23 CEST

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