Tino Schwarze wrote on Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:12:08 +0200:
> > > It looks like there are revisions which refer to future revisions.
> >
> > That's... weird.
> >
> > > Did I
> > > miss something? I've seen rep-cache.db hanging around - might this have
> > > caused problems since it still contained references to revisions I've
> > > removed? According to
> > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/structure
> > > it is safe to remove the rep-cache.db I'd just lose representation
> > > sharing for my testing repository, right?
> >
> > You will lose the ability for future revisions to re-use the reps
> > indexed in the database. Existing rep sharing will not be affected.
> >
> > If you'd like to disable rep-sharing, then use the fsfs.conf file, or
> > create a format-3 filesystem (via 'svnadmin create --pre-1.5-compatible')
>
> I don't want to disable rep-sharing. I just wondered whether rep-sharing
> might have introduce these pointers to future revisions since there
> might have been references to 115310 in rep-cache.db which got reused?
>
Reference to rN are added to the DB at the time rN is committed.
I don't see how forward-pointing references are possible.
> Maybe I'll try removing >115278 again, then delete rep-cache.db, then
> perform all those steps again...
>
Disable rep-sharing via the config file, too. Otherwise, the DB will be
re-created and whatever conflict you have between r115301 and r115310
will re-surface, since both of them are inside the replayed range.
> Thanks,
>
> Tino.
>
> --
> "What we nourish flourishes." - "Was wir nähren erblüht."
>
> www.tisc.de
Received on 2010-09-29 10:24:18 CEST