> -Original Message-
> From: Markus Schaber [mailto:m.scha...@codesys.com]
> Sent: maandag 27 januari 2014 13:36
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: AW: FSFS rep-cache validation
>
> Hi,
>
> Von: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.mar...@wandisco.com]
> > Philip Martin writes:
> >
> > >
Philip Martin writes:
> Stefan Fuhrmann writes:
>
>> But we do write the database strictly in revision order.
>> So, if we could simply read the latest record once upon
>> opening the DB. If that refers to a future revision, read
>> "current" and compare. If the DB it still "in the future",
>> a
Stefan Fuhrmann writes:
> But we do write the database strictly in revision order.
> So, if we could simply read the latest record once upon
> opening the DB. If that refers to a future revision, read
> "current" and compare. If the DB it still "in the future",
> abort txn, i.e. prevent any futur
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
> On IRC today we were discussing the validation code in
> svn_fs_fs__set_rep_reference. When inserting a row into the rep-cache
> the insert can fail because the row already exists. The usual way this
> would happen is that two parallel com
> -Original Message-
> From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.mar...@wandisco.com]
> Sent: donderdag 23 januari 2014 11:55
> To: Julian Foad
> Cc: Philip Martin; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: FSFS rep-cache validation
>
> Julian Foad writes:
>
>
Julian Foad writes:
> I get the problem. By "store its own 'head' revision" I meant store
> the maximum value of any referenced revision number -- in other words,
> simply a substitute for having an index and querying the maximum value
> in the index. If we update this value correctly then it wou
Philip Martin wrote:
> Julian Foad writes:
>> Ugh -- the doc string says if REJECT_DUP is TRUE, "return an error if
>> there is an existing match for REP->CHECKSUM" but the implementation
>> does something else: return an error if an existing match points to a
>> different rep (that is, a dif
Julian Foad writes:
> Ugh -- the doc string says if REJECT_DUP is TRUE, "return an error if
> there is an existing match for REP->CHECKSUM" but the implementation
> does something else: return an error if an existing match points to a
> different rep (that is, a different rev/index/size), but ret
Philip Martin wrote:
> On IRC today we were discussing the validation code in
> svn_fs_fs__set_rep_reference. When inserting a row into the rep-cache
> the insert can fail because the row already exists. The usual way this
> would happen is that two parallel commits add content with the
> same c
9 matches
Mail list logo