On Sun, 2005-01-05 at 19:55 -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On May 1, 2005, at 1:17 PM, Christopher Ness wrote:
> > I thought that the commit was successful since it was in the repository
> > (atomic commits!) until I checked it out into another WC, untar'd the
> > source over it again and then ran `svn status` to see a bunch of files
> > identified with '?'.
> Sorry, I don't understand what in this description makes you think that
> only a partial changeset was committed.
> In the world of FSFS, the new revision-tree is assembled as a single
> file in the repos/db/txns/ directory, then the "atomicity" comes from a
> single move of that file to repos/db/revs/. So either the file is
> moved, or it isn't.
Ahhh... no not a partial file, but some files were left out of the
revision that were identified as "to be added". I was under the
impression that everything was added successfully or nothing was added
This is rather stress testing though as the kernel probably has +1400
files in it that I was attempting to add.
Software Engineering IV,
PGP Public Key: http://www.nesser.org/pgp-key/
22:01:12 up 7 days, 1:24, 1 user, load average: 0.37, 0.10, 0.03
Received on Mon May 2 04:07:32 2005