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

Re: [DISCUSS] delete ra_neon

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 09:12:09 -0400

On 05/19/2012 03:20 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com> wrote:
>> I'm still in favor to include properties in update REPORT (Mike's
>> approach). PROPFINDs are not cached by proxies and working copy. There
>> are relatively small, so there is no real benefit to fetch them using
>> separate request.
>
> If you do that, then you have to store all of the properties in-memory
> for the entire checkout or serialize on to disk or something
> similar...ugh.

Yeah, we still have the cache-the-props-till-we-can-use-them issue with this
approach. Only a full-fledged "send-all" REPORT mode lets us avoid that.

> I'd also be curious how much extra time it takes to include the
> properties in the REPORT response - it's not going to be free and may
> not even be cheap. =( -- justin

Nah, my timings seemed to indicate that including the properties in the
REPORT response costs next-to-nothing. The server-side editor is already
feeding them to mod_dav_svn, it's just that in "skelta" mode, mod_dav_svn
drops the data and assumes the client will PROPFIND for it again later.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Enterprise Cloud Development

Received on 2012-05-21 15:12:47 CEST

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