On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 8:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> On 11/30/2012 09:44 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:52 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>>> [I'm going to try to summarize the body of responses generated from this
>>> original query -- a conversational reset, if you will -- so as to keep this
>>> line of inquiry moving toward closure.]
>>>
>> [..]
>>
>>>
>>>> 3) libsvn_ra_serf stabilization. I know there have been a couple concerns
>>>> that Philip has raised (EAGAIN and the random failures).
>>>
>>> Philip and Ivan both seem keen on reinstating ra_neon.
>>>
>> While I was strongly against making ra_serf as default in svn 1.7, I
>> don't remember that I suggested to reinstate ra_neon.
>
> Oops! Sorry for misrepresenting you views!
>
No problem :)
>> I believe that most of the issues comes from the skelta mode (XML
>> report with many PROPFINDs/GETs) update editor implementation in
>> ra_serf.
>
> [...]
>
>> We already reduced number of requests for 1.8 servers, so may be we
>> can choose to use "skelta mode" for 1.8 servers and non-skelta
>> (ra_neon style) for pre-1.8 servers?
>
> I'm adding send-all support to ra_serf right now, but will leave it #if'd
> out until we decide in what scenarios we wish to use it.
>
Wow! That's great! Are you going to add it to existing code or
implement separate update_editor? Implementing separate update_editor
may be better since current implementation is extremely overloaded.
--
Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2012-11-30 19:19:40 CET