Michael Sinz wrote:
> I would very strongly be against anything that reduces the precision of
> the data on the server. If the server's clock is not accurate, then that
> is not Subversion's fault. Let the server admin fix it (or buy a better
> server or...) Chopping off precision just because some user interface
> issues due to too much precision is wrong. Just make the UI smarter about
> how to deal with that. You can always change, enhance, etc. that behavior
> if the data is there. If you don't have the data, you now have lost
> the ability to ever expand into, say 1/10 second or 1/100 second or
> whatever
> resolution you might think is reasonable.
>
You misunderstand. I'm saying _all_ normal server hardware clocks,
regardless of whether the machine is synced via NTP or some other
superior method (like taiclock), lack the accuracy to justify the amount
of precision allocated. The crystals used in conventional computer
hardware just aren't all that accurate. And depending on your O/S, your
clock could use skew or step to adjust time with an external source,
which adds additional noise to the timestamp.
I don't have any problem setting the resolution at something less than a
second; going to 1/100ths or 1/1000ths is probably good. Milliseconds
are reasonable; microseconds gets into the range of context swaps in the
kernel (i.e. noise) and nanoseconds (or god forbid attoseconds) are just
fictional for conventional PC's.
John
--
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Suite H
Lanham, MD 20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5748
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Aug 31 22:33:52 2005