On 05/18/2012 04:15 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Greg Stein <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Ivan Zhakov <[email protected]> wrote: >>> ... >>> I meant one PROPFIND per directory. I didn't see where PROPFIND with >>> "1" depth is created. It used only in svn_ra_serf__get_dir() but not >>> in update driver code. >> >> Today, we do a PROPFIND per node. I want to change it to >> per-directory. IOW, on my todo list. (there is an open issue about it) >> > This is future plan, but Mike said that we currently send PROPFIND > with depth "1" for each added directory.
I was referring to Greg's future plan using present-tense verbs. Sorry for the confusion. Today, we send one depth-zero PROPFIND per node (files and directories both). I have a patch which reduces this to one depth-zero PROPFIND per directory (because file props are delivered inline in the REPORT response). Greg was suggesting that we not bother with my patch, because he wants to also reduce this to one PROPFIND per directory, but those PROPFINDs would be depth-one. So, all properties would still be delivered via PROPFINDs (as opposed to inline in the REPORT respones) as are today, but we'd use one (larger, depth-one) PROPFIND per directory instead of one PROPFIND per directory-and-file. And if this fails to clear things up, too bad -- I quit and we'll just talk about in Berlin. :-P -- C. Michael Pilato <[email protected]> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
