On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 06:40, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 02:34:44AM -0500, Greg Stein wrote: >> Hyrum, >> >> On IRC, we also talked about trying to remove stat() calls from the >> parse function. Upon reflection, that won't be possible. If the given >> path is below a wcroot, then we cannot simply return that wcroot. We >> need to see if the path is in a CHILD wcroot (think: nested wcroots in >> a disjoint working copy). Thus, we need to examine the disk to look >> for the closest wcroot to a given path. > > Greg, > > it would be really interesting to know your opinion on this thread, > because it is slightly related: > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201102.mbox/%3c20110223153217.gg29...@jack.stsp.name%3E > (same message in a different archive: > http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2011-02/0789.shtml) > >> If we continue to keep a mapping of dirpath->wcroot, then we can avoid >> future stat calls after the first (effectively, it is a cache). For a >> file, we will always need a stat since the fname will not be in a >> memory structure. When the file is discovered, the parent directory >> may be in the cache and no further stats will be required. > > I think the current local_abspath->wcroot mapping approach is broken for > svn:externals, as long externals have their own wc.db. There are two > valid results in that situation. > > It's possible that what the code does right now is not what's intended, > but on the surface it looks more like a gap in the current design than > an implementation error.
Ah! This is your externals problem? Yeah. I'll read up on the thread. Hyrum and I planned some revisions in this area, and it sounds like I should keep more in mind. WIll Do. Thanks. Cheers, -g
