Around about 08/02/11 01:58, Daniel Shahaf typed ...
I'm concerned; that doesn't sound like a good process to develop
a patch. Normally backporting a patch is a matter of finding
N applicable revisions and merging them... but it sounds that here
you're re-developing the feature from scratch.
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
[snip]
> Their FAQ (http://www.sqlite.org/faq.html#q19) sure suggests that it's
> not wise to do separate inserts: the document says SQLite easily does
> 50k inserts per sec into a table on moderate hardware, but only
> roughly 60 transactions
Neil Bird wrote on Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 08:39:04 +:
> Around about 08/02/11 01:58, Daniel Shahaf typed ...
>> I'm concerned; that doesn't sound like a good process to develop
>> a patch. Normally backporting a patch is a matter of finding
>> N applicable revisions and merging them... but it so
> -Original Message-
> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@xbc.nu] On Behalf Of Branko Cibej
> Sent: dinsdag 8 februari 2011 4:39
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: SQLite and callbacks
>
> On 07.02.2011 21:51, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >> A lot of wc databases out there will be
Prabhu,
Please send the patch against the current HEAD.
With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
-Original Message-
From: Prabhu Gnana Sundar Ponnarasu
Sent: Tue 2/8/2011 1:11 PM
To: Kamesh Jayachandran
Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: [PATCH] New XFail test for issue 3781
Hi Kamesh,
I
I ran into this while trying to 'svn up' today, and managed to reproduce
it in another working copy:
% svn revert -R .
% cat ./before
Index: subversion/include/svn_diff.h
===
--- subversion/include/svn_diff.h (revision 1067829)
Hi,
Sorry for posting an older patch. Now attached the correct patch.
Please share your views.
Thanks and regards
Prabhu
On Tuesday 08 February 2011 04:41 PM, Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
Prabhu,
Please send the patch against the current HEAD.
With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
Index: sub
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:50:46AM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@xbc.nu] On Behalf Of Branko Cibej
> > Sent: dinsdag 8 februari 2011 4:39
> > To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: SQLite and callbacks
> >
> > On 07.02.
Thanks Prabhu.
I committed with the following tweaks in r1068411.
1. Added @XFail(), @Issue(3781) decorators
2.
+ # test the case-sensitivity of the repo name
+ write_authz_file(sbox, {},
+ sections = {mixed_case_repo_dir + ":/": "jrandom = r",
+
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:14 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 02/07/2011 03:44 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Paul Burba writes:
>>
>>> Do "DAV clients sometimes LOCK non-existent paths, as a way of
>>> reserving names"? I'm not sure exactly what that means, does anyone
>>> have an inkling?
>>
>> I
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Sperling [mailto:s...@elego.de]
> Sent: dinsdag 8 februari 2011 15:18
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: 'Branko Čibej'; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: SQLite and callbacks
>
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:50:46AM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> -Original Message-
> From: Kamesh Jayachandran [mailto:kam...@collab.net]
> Sent: dinsdag 8 februari 2011 15:30
> To: Prabhu Gnana Sundar Ponnarasu
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] New XFail test for issue 3781
>
>
> Thanks Prabhu.
>
> I committed with the follo
The patch no longer applies cleanly to trunk. Can you regenerate it?
--
C. Michael Pilato
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:34:52PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> There is nobody actively working on status and there are no open
> issues on status to block branching...
There's the general wc-ng performance issue (but I don't think it has
an issue number attached to it right now).
> So if statu
The buildbot is red:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/svn-x64-ubuntu%20gcc/builds/1514/steps/Test%20bindings/logs/stdio
The Ruby bindings are triggering the new fspath asserts. The problem occurs in
test_report and test_report2 in:
subversion/bindings/swig/ruby/test/test_repos.rb
I can fix the as
Stefan Sperling writes:
> Ah, so status performs well using per-node queries?
> I thought it was still worse compared to 1.6.x for some use cases.
> See http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-09/0526.shtml
> I think we should try to get trunk to perform at least as well as 1.6.x
> for all uses cases
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> hwri...@apache.org wrote on Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 22:09:15 -:
>> Author: hwright
>> Date: Mon Feb 7 22:09:15 2011
>> New Revision: 1068169
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1068169&view=rev
>> Log:
>> * tools/server-side/svn-popu
On 08.02.2011 16:34, Bert Huijben wrote:
> An even better solution would be that SQLite tries to do things completely in
> memory and only *creates* a tempfile when needed. (It seems it now creates
> the file anyway; but doesn't use it until needed. Introducing a heavy
> performance penalty on N
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:34:52PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> There is nobody actively working on status and there are no open
>> issues on status to block branching...
>
> There's the general wc-ng performance issue (but I don't think it
I'll look into these.
On 02/08/2011 11:36 AM, Philip Martin wrote:
> The buildbot is red:
>
> http://ci.apache.org/builders/svn-x64-ubuntu%20gcc/builds/1514/steps/Test%20bindings/logs/stdio
>
> The Ruby bindings are triggering the new fspath asserts. The problem occurs
> in
> test_report and
On 08.02.2011 03:58, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
The new function should be marked 'static'.
Also, they aren't in the proper namespaces: one is in svn_ despite being
file-private, and the other is in apr_'s space.
renamed in r1068520.
Stefan
--
___
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 06:02:28PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 08.02.2011 16:34, Bert Huijben wrote:
> > An even better solution would be that SQLite tries to do things completely
> > in memory and only *creates* a tempfile when needed. (It seems it now
> > creates the file anyway; but doesn'
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 05:13:50PM +, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:34:52PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
> >> There is nobody actively working on status and there are no open
> >> issues on status to block branching.
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 05:13:50PM +, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> > On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:34:52PM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> >> There is nobody actively working on status an
I noticed the current minimal required serf version on trunk is 0.3.1.
I've only been paying tangential attention, but I seem to recall that
there have a been a number of improvements in recent versions of Serf
which affect memory and other stability issues. Should we bump the
required version (o
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 07:40:03PM +, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> One of my greater concerns is that we don't have a concrete answer to
> "we'll release when " for the performance question. What is good
> enough? Which operations? How much better than 1.6.x? Having a
> concrete answer, and
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> I ran into this while trying to 'svn up' today, and managed to reproduce
> it in another working copy:
>
> % svn revert -R .
> % cat ./before
> Index: subversion/include/svn_diff.h
>
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 07:40:03PM +, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> One of my greater concerns is that we don't have a concrete answer to
>> "we'll release when " for the performance question. What is good
>> enough? Which operations?
Yeesh. I find Ruby incredibly difficult to read, but I'm fairly certain
that this test is bogus in many ways. The "target" passed to
svn_repos_begin_report() was never supposed to be anything but a relpath.
From it's docstring:
@a target is a single path component, used to limit the scope of
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> I noticed the current minimal required serf version on trunk is 0.3.1.
> I've only been paying tangential attention, but I seem to recall that
> there have a been a number of improvements in recent versions of Serf
> which affect memory and
On 02/08/2011 03:24 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> I noticed the current minimal required serf version on trunk is 0.3.1.
>> I've only been paying tangential attention, but I seem to recall that
>> there have a been a number of improvements in rec
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 8:40 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 02/08/2011 03:24 PM, Paul Burba wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> I noticed the current minimal required serf version on trunk is 0.3.1.
>>> I've only been paying tangential attention, but I seem to r
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 4:09 AM, wrote:
> Author: rhuijben
> Date: Fri Nov 12 12:09:11 2010
> New Revision: 1034362
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1034362&view=rev
> Log:
> Move projects generated by the Windows build to the right locations. The
> necessary changes in the python script
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM, wrote:
> Author: hwright
> Date: Tue Feb 8 21:25:12 2011
> New Revision: 1068585
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/commit.c
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/commit.c?rev=1068585&r1=1068584&r2=10
Hi,
Attached is a completed patch to resolve issue 3686[1], where the executable
bit is not maintained during the merge of a binary file.
I thought about making this change more generic, and applying it to text
files as well (there was discussion with performance of simple-case merging
a month ag
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM, wrote:
>> Author: hwright
>> Date: Tue Feb 8 21:25:12 2011
>> New Revision: 1068585
>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra_serf/commit.c
>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/s
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> I ran into this while trying to 'svn up' today, and managed to reproduce
>> it in another working copy:
>>
>> % svn revert -R .
>> % cat ./before
>> Index: subversion/include/svn_diff.
On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 07:34:53AM +1000, Daniel Becroft wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Attached is a completed patch to resolve issue 3686[1], where the executable
> bit is not maintained during the merge of a binary file.
>
> I thought about making this change more generic, and applying it to text
> files as
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:45:03PM +0100, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Daniel Shahaf
> > wrote:
> >> I ran into this while trying to 'svn up' today, and managed to reproduce
> >> it in another working copy:
>
Okay, I've fixed a problem in libsvn_repos. And I've reworked this test
into something at least ... meaningful.
On 02/08/2011 03:20 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Yeesh. I find Ruby incredibly difficult to read, but I'm fairly certain
> that this test is bogus in many ways. The "target" passed
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 07:34:53AM +1000, Daniel Becroft wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Attached is a completed patch to resolve issue 3686[1], where the
> executable
> > bit is not maintained during the merge of a binary file.
> >
> > I thought a
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:45:03PM +0100, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Daniel Shahaf
>> > wrote:
>> >> I ran into this while trying to 'svn up' toda
Hey Paul,
I saw the recent spring cleaning efforts, and doing my bid is on the
to-do list ... as soon as the rest of the world step off my toes ;)
Hmm, can't really say when that will be, though.
I hope it happens soon, otherwise please nudge me more or take things
over at your own discretion.
~
On 08.02.2011 18:13, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> It shouldn't be difficult to create a large working copy ('svn co
> ^/subversion') and use that for testing, but getting more insight than
> just our own dataset would be very nice.
Except that, as I noted elsewhere in this thread, even 'svn co
^/subver
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 11:37:16PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 08.02.2011 18:13, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> > It shouldn't be difficult to create a large working copy ('svn co
> > ^/subversion') and use that for testing, but getting more insight than
> > just our own dataset would be very nice.
>
On 07.02.2011 21:57, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 09:32:48PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 07.02.2011 17:10, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>> The bug is probabaly in the following query.
>>> Maybe the INSERT OR REPLACE doesn't work as intended?
>>> And why is COMMIT TRANSACTION com
On 08.02.2011 23:47, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 11:37:16PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 08.02.2011 18:13, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> It shouldn't be difficult to create a large working copy ('svn co
>>> ^/subversion') and use that for testing, but getting more insight than
On 08.02.2011 23:57, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 08.02.2011 23:47, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 11:37:16PM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> On 08.02.2011 18:13, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
It shouldn't be difficult to create a large working copy ('svn co
^/subversion') and use t
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:19 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:45:03PM +0100, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:01 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Daniel Shahaf
>
Try sending a mail to dev-unsubscr...@subversion.apache.org
Johan
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Stimely, Noelle
wrote:
> How do I unsubscribe to this group?
>
> Thanks...
>
> Noelle
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 0
On 08.02.2011 23:50, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Well, here it is, I fixed the thinko in the actual_props query and got
> all prop_tests to pass with this version. Did I say that the way
> ACTUAL_NODE is separate from NODE makes these kinds of WC operations
> (that merge results from both tables) quite c
Branko Čibej writes:
> Using Serf 0.7.1 definitely helps, the checkout of
> ^/subversion/tags/ebcdic was now successful, took 19 minutes and got svn
> memory usage up to 360MB. I'm not too happy about the last two points,
> but at least it works.
I checked out ^/subversion/branches using HEAD ov
On 2/8/11 4:01 PM, stef...@apache.org wrote:
Author: stefan2
Date: Wed Feb 9 00:01:04 2011
New Revision: 1068695
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1068695&view=rev
Log:
Introduce svn_stream_skip() and svn_stream_buffered() stream API functions
and implement them for all stream types.
Hi S
On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 20:27 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > Also instead of nebulous handwaving about "performance is bad", it
> > would be nice to have actually datasets and actual numbers. We have a
> > VM at the ASF which could be used for hosting a set of benchmarking
> > data; we just need
Thanks for the feedback, Blair!
I will look into this tomorrow.
-- Stefan^2.
On 09.02.2011 02:07, Blair Zajac wrote:
On 2/8/11 4:01 PM, stef...@apache.org wrote:
Author: stefan2
Date: Wed Feb 9 00:01:04 2011
New Revision: 1068695
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1068695&view=rev
Log:
In
Stefan,
> < wayita> stefan2: danielsh said: does 'svnadmin dump/verify' use the caches
> by default?
> <@stefan2> danielsh: yes. However, the biggest performance improvement for
> dump / verify
>will come from delta-caching. This is like 2 merges away. I'm
> currently
>
Johan Corveleyn wrote on Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 13:20:29 +0100:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Could you have a look? (attached)
>
> Nice. It looks good to me (haven't tested it, just looked at the code;
> I assume it passes with trunk?)
>
Thanks, yes, r1068749.
While
Did you mean to commit a deletion of the back (I'm guessing 50) lines
of the file?
-Hyrum
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:41 PM, wrote:
> Author: danielsh
> Date: Wed Feb 9 03:41:58 2011
> New Revision: 1068750
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1068750&view=rev
> Log:
> * configure.ac:
> Ma
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 13:20:29 +0100:
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf
>> wrote:
>> > Could you have a look? (attached)
>>
>> Nice. It looks good to me (haven't tested it, just looked at the code;
>> I
Hyrum K Wright wrote on Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 16:59:13 +:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > hwri...@apache.org wrote on Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 22:09:15 -:
> >> Author: hwright
> >> Date: Mon Feb 7 22:09:15 2011
> >> New Revision: 1068169
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apa
Hyrum K Wright wrote on Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 21:47:12 -0600:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 13:20:29 +0100:
> >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf
> >> wrote:
> >> > Could you have a look? (attached)
> >>
> >>
ssh ne...@svn-qavm.apache.org
Use the ssh key you use for people.apache.org. (And please add it to
svn in the designated location; see pmc/machines/notes/ for the URL.)
Daniel
Neels Hofmeyr wrote on Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 02:38:49 +0100:
> On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 20:27 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
"C. Michael Pilato" writes:
> The patch no longer applies cleanly to trunk. Can you regenerate it?
Please find attached updated patch.
Thanks and Regards
Noorul
Index: subversion/tests/cmdline/cat_tests.py
===
--- subversion/test
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Hyrum K Wright wrote on Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 21:47:12 -0600:
>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf
>> wrote:
>> > Johan Corveleyn wrote on Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 13:20:29 +0100:
>> >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf
64 matches
Mail list logo
