Am Sonntag, 1. November 2009 13:52:47 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net: > The original idea for versioning filesystems was to automatically keep > track of individual changes, and it failed magnificently.
As far as I know they didn't have atomic commits back then - am I right in that? > This is BTW the same reason why I consider the manual git-gc to be a > feature, as opposed to other systems that try to do various kinds of > automatic packing and garbage collection... He, it goes on ;) For Mercurial I know that it performs automatic packing, but no garbage collection, because its repository model doesn't need garbage collection. Keyphrase: "disk-access optimized compressed incremental diffs with snapshots, and one data file per file in the repo." -> http://hgbook.red-bean.com/read/behind-the-scenes.html > Well, actually the snapshotting functionality is kind a side effect of > atomic updates, which comes almost for free. But it's generally seen as > a feature for easing backups. How exactly do they differ from a normal file system with a Mercurial/Git backend for revisioning with a time-based commit schedule? Best wishes, Arne --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- - singing a part of the history of free software - http://infinite-hands.draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
