Bert Huijben wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 15:09:12 +0200: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: danie...@apache.org [mailto:danie...@apache.org] > > Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27 > > To: comm...@subversion.apache.org > > Subject: svn commit: r1132972 - > > /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql > > > > Author: danielsh > > Date: Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011 > > New Revision: 1132972 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132972&view=rev > > Log: > > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql > > (i_revision): Remove as duplicate. > > > > Thread: http://mid.gmane.org/877h94hz77....@stat.home.lan > > > > Modified: > > subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql > > > > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql > > URL: > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/re > > vprops-db.sql?rev=1132972&r1=1132971&r2=1132972&view=diff > > ========================================================== > > ==================== > > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql (original) > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7 > > 12:27:03 2011 > > @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1; > > create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null, > > properties BLOB not null); > > > > -create index i_revision on revprop (revision); > > +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index: > > + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision); > > + > > + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs > > + its own index. > > + */ > > + > > Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique? >
IIRC there is no functional difference in the case, but I agree that spelling out PRIMARY KEY will be better, will look into that. > Bert > >
