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

Re: svn commit: r1657846 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc: wc-queries.sql wc_db.c wc_db.h wc_db_private.h wc_db_update_move.c

From: Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:50:33 +0100

On 06.02.2015 16:48, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:brane_at_wandisco.com]
>> Sent: vrijdag 6 februari 2015 15:58
>> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1657846 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc:
>> wc-queries.sql wc_db.c wc_db.h wc_db_private.h wc_db_update_move.c
>>
>> On 06.02.2015 15:46, rhuijben_at_apache.org wrote:
>>> Author: rhuijben
>>> Date: Fri Feb 6 14:46:49 2015
>>> New Revision: 1657846
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1657846
>>> Log:
>>> Instead of transforming nodes into an copy by changing their op-depth make
>>> a proper copy, to allow the layer bump code to handle further edge cases
>>> like things that are recorded while shadowing.
>>
>> How will this affect working copy compatibility? Will 1.8.x, when seeing
>> a trunk WC with such records in it, know what to do about them?
> This is just an intermediate state that doesn't exist outside the sqlite transaction that we run the code in.
>
> The previous intermediate state, could (when the transaction would be stopped halfway) cause some differences between the working copy and the repository. While the new code keeps the database valid.
>
>
> But as noted: all this is inside a transaction, so if something fails it is not committed.

Thanks; that wasn't too obvious from the diff or log message.

-- Brane
Received on 2015-02-06 16:51:09 CET

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