Re: Who else is using SVN for large-binary-asset storage?
From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com>
Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 14:36:10 -0500
On 25 Apr 2020, Mark Phippard wrote:
(At a certain point this discussion should start happening on dev@, probably.)
Obviously, the UI by which one accesses this proposed new feature is separate from how the feature is implemented under the hood.
Given that keeping or not keeping text bases is a purely client-side concern, properties shouldn't be the only UI gateway to this feature. It's even more important to offer client-side *configuration* to be able to say things like:
* Files larger than size X don't keep a text base
* Files of mime-type BLAH don't keep a text base
* Files with at least one property from [some set of arbitrary properties] don't keep a text base
The key thing is that the client decides, since this is purely a client-side decision about trading off between local storage cost and network turnarounds for diff and revert.
>I am not sure Karl's use case but I know video game
The use case I have in mind is exactly that one: checking out files that are both large and non-mergeable anyway (luckily, these two things tend to go together).
>But the final goal should be something like this (in order of
If (1), then (2) is implied (unless by "deltification" you just mean "compression without reference to any pristine text base").
(3) and (4) are a separate project IMHO. They're interesting ideas & worth pursuing, but they have no effect on client side storage and are thus outside the scope of what I was proposing FWIW.
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.