Re: Deterministic FSFS revision files

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> On 07/30/2012 12:47 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
>> I'm considering changing the commit code so that hashes are written in a
>> stable order and the revision files are repeatable. Does anyone think
>> this would be a bad idea?
>
> I can't think of any reason not to do this. The performance overhead will
> be minimal, I should think, and you've already outlined the benefits.

As long as the performance overhead is negligible, I think having
deterministic ordering is very desirable. There's just something in
me that longs to have a One True Ordering in dumpfiles and revfiles
and output and everything else. I can't really say why, but it feels
like by having a canonical ordering, we open ourselves up for more
opportunities to cache work moving forward.

(How's that for nebulous and hand wavy?)

-Hyrum
Received on 2012-07-31 01:58:51 CEST