On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 18:16, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright
>>> wrote:
[ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 18:16, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright
>> wrote:
>>> [ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report this
>>> here.]
>>>
>>> I'm trying to debug the Ev2 shims ove
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Hyrum K Wright
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> On F
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> With the change below, we can send all requests using Content-Length
> rather than chunking. This is the core work for fixing issue 3979.
>
> My question: should we simply bump the minimum serf to 1.1, or should
> we just omit the C
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 18:16, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright
>> wrote:
>>> [ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report this
>>> here.]
>>>
>>> I'm trying to debug the Ev2 shims ove
Jason Wong wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 15:34:53 -0700:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Jason Wong wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 13:41:19 -0700:
> >> Hello Daniel, Philip.
> >>
> >> I have been following the thread: "#4129 is reproducible Re:
> >> predecessor count for
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 18:16, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright
> wrote:
>> [ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report this
>> here.]
>>
>> I'm trying to debug the Ev2 shims over ra_dav. In doing so, I've
>> discovered an inconsistency
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> [ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report this
> here.]
>
> I'm trying to debug the Ev2 shims over ra_dav. In doing so, I've
> discovered an inconsistency between ra_serf and ra_neon (surprise!)
ra_neon uses a "rep
Hey all,
With the change below, we can send all requests using Content-Length
rather than chunking. This is the core work for fixing issue 3979.
My question: should we simply bump the minimum serf to 1.1, or should
we just omit the Content-Length functionality? If the latter, then
users may run i
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> [ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report this
> here.]
>
> I'm trying to debug the Ev2 shims over ra_dav. In doing so, I've
> discovered an inconsistency between ra_serf and ra_neon (surprise!)
>
> ra_neon provid
Jason Wong wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 13:41:19 -0700:
> Hello Daniel, Philip.
>
> I have been following the thread: "#4129 is reproducible Re:
> predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message".
> It looks like you all have it figured out now. Good job.
>
> Do you need any more i
Hello all.
I'm trying to understand the principles how SVN calculates paths for diff.
I've put repository attached under URL "http://localhost/svn";. I'll put its
history here:
r4 | dmit10 | 2012-03-19 20:34:31 +0100 (Пнд, 1
[ warning: investigation is still ongoing, but I thought I'd report this here.]
I'm trying to debug the Ev2 shims over ra_dav. In doing so, I've
discovered an inconsistency between ra_serf and ra_neon (surprise!)
ra_neon provides a valid argument for the replaced_rev parameter of
the Ev1 delete_
Philip Martin wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 18:45:37 +:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
> > If I use the debugger to manually set target->node_revision to NULL
> > inside svn_fs_fs__dag_increment_mergeinfo_count then the commit works.
> > I'm not exactly sure how all the FSFS caching layers are sup
Philip Martin writes:
> If I use the debugger to manually set target->node_revision to NULL
> inside svn_fs_fs__dag_increment_mergeinfo_count then the commit works.
> I'm not exactly sure how all the FSFS caching layers are supposed to
> interact. Is tree.c:update_ancestry supposed to update the
Philip Martin wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 18:31:41 +:
> Daniel Shahaf writes:
>
> > C. Michael Pilato wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 13:57:51 -0400:
> >> Is this problem specific to the FSFS backend?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > % ../runpytest svnadmin mergeinfo_race --fs-type bdb
> > 2012-03-19 20:2
Hi Jim,
That indeed does appear to be a bug. I filed a new issue to cover it:
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4144
I also created a test of a similar scenario that demonstrates the same
problem you found:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1302588
If you a
On 03/19/2012 02:24 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
> "C. Michael Pilato" writes:
>> Is this problem specific to the FSFS backend?
>
> Yes, I think it is.
>
> For BDB the dag_node_t type in dag.c doesn't have a node_revision
> member. When update_ancestry does svn_fs_bdb__put_node_revision it
> writes
Daniel Shahaf writes:
> C. Michael Pilato wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 13:57:51 -0400:
>> Is this problem specific to the FSFS backend?
>
> No.
>
> % ../runpytest svnadmin mergeinfo_race --fs-type bdb
> 2012-03-19 20:21:44 [WARNING] CWD:
> /home/daniel/src/svn/t1/subversion/tests/cmdline
> 2012
"C. Michael Pilato" writes:
> On 03/19/2012 01:25 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Philip Martin writes:
>>
>>> I can reproduce ove ra_local:
>>>
>>> svnadmin create repo
>>> svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/A
>>> svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/B
>>> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc1
>>> svn co file://`p
C. Michael Pilato wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 13:57:51 -0400:
> Is this problem specific to the FSFS backend?
No.
% ../runpytest svnadmin mergeinfo_race --fs-type bdb
2012-03-19 20:21:44 [WARNING] CWD:
/home/daniel/src/svn/t1/subversion/tests/cmdline
2012-03-19 20:21:44 [WARNING] EXCEPTION: Fa
On 03/19/2012 01:25 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
>> I can reproduce ove ra_local:
>>
>> svnadmin create repo
>> svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/A
>> svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/B
>> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc1
>> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc2
>> svn ps svn:mergeinfo /P:2
Philip Martin wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 17:25:22 +:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
> > I can reproduce ove ra_local:
> >
> > svnadmin create repo
> > svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/A
> > svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/B
> > svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc1
> > svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc2
> > sv
Philip Martin writes:
> I can reproduce ove ra_local:
>
> svnadmin create repo
> svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/A
> svn mkdir -mm file://`pwd`/repo/B
> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc1
> svn co file://`pwd`/repo wc2
> svn ps svn:mergeinfo /P:2 wc1/A
> svn ps svn:mergeinfo /Q:2 wc2/B
> svn mkdir wc1/
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Hyrum K Wright
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Joe Swatosh wrote:
> On Fri, M
Daniel Shahaf writes:
> The bug reproduced with either "ServerLimit 1" or "ThreadLimit 1" in
> httpd.conf. (That forced both commits to be served by the same process
> (resp., by different processes).) I use httpd 2.4.1 with event MPM.
I can reproduce ove ra_local:
svnadmin create repo
svn mk
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:56:48AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> I would like to help with getting another 1.6.x release out by running
> the release process for 1.6.18.
Reminder: Please vote for 1.6.18 fixes until Thursday 18:00 CET.
>From my point of view, these are the most important items.
On 03/16/2012 01:24 AM, Prabhu Gnana Sundar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The "re" library is never used in the mergeinfo-sanitizer.py script, hence
> it can be removed.
> Also improved the "usage" description to show the usage of the options and
> set the 'executable' property.
Committed in r1302424. Thanks
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 16:28:21 +0200:
> [ cc += dev@. summary for dev@: investigating issue #4129: predecessor
> count of rN is not incremented by one wrt that of r(N-1); see
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4129 ]
Okay, count me happy :-) I can reprodu
Johan Corveleyn wrote on Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:12:13 +0100:
> Now, first of all this requires that the numbers can be compared over
> time, which hinges on the stability of the perf-testsuite, and also
> the stability of the machine and its environment. The former seems
> relatively stable. I don
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:52 AM, wrote:
> /home/neels/svnbench/20120319-002438
> Started at Mon Mar 19 00:24:38 UTC 2012
>
> *Disclaimer:* this tests only file://-URL access on a GNU/Linux VM.
> This is intended to measure changes in performance of the local working
> copy la
Daniel Shahaf writes:
>> From what is there so far, yes. We do have different operations
>> occurring at the same time, but for these ones, I see MERGE and DELETE
>> verbs overlapping in the same or near time intervals according to the
>> Apache logs. I just did a quick look in the Apache logs du
32 matches
Mail list logo
