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

Re: Communication of CHANGES

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com>
Date: 2007-11-26 22:45:09 CET

"Mark Phippard" <markphip@gmail.com> writes:
> I am skeptical that caching this information would make a significant
> performance difference, and I am very much against this regardless.
> We also use this API in Subclipse. much like TortoiseSVN does. While
> I would love for it to run faster, I need the information to be
> accurate, including the revision number. If you simply cache the
> information once you know an item is out of date, then you no longer
> are guaranteed to have an accurate revision number. That would be a
> show-stopper for me.
> Like I said, I am in favor of making something faster if it can be
> done. But I also need the API to continue to be completely accurate.

Well, these two goals are not in conflict. It would be perfectly
possible to design different APIs for "Is this file out of date?" vs
"What is the most recent revision in which this file was changed?"

The fact that the latter question is effectively a superset of the
former, and that the current API only offers the latter, does not
limit what we do with future APIs.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 26 22:46:18 2007

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.