I wish you wouldn't change the subject line so often. Bert and I responded to the original email.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 13:45, Julian Foad <julian.f...@wandisco.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-08-20, Greg Stein wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:31, <julianf...@apache.org> wrote: >> > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/upgrade.c Fri Aug 20 14:31:27 >> > 2010 >> > @@ -1420,9 +1420,7 @@ svn_wc__upgrade_sdb(int *result_format, >> > /* ### TODO: Either upgrade to single-DB format here, or quit >> > * at format 18 and ask the user to run the external script >> > * 'tools/dev/wc-ng/bump-to-19.py'. */ >> >> When you first checked in the script, I assumed you were doing that >> for rapid dev/test. There is no way that I would ever support an >> external script to perform this upgrade. > > Wasn't sure yet how it's going to work out. The script is to get us > going while we figure out how to do the 'proper' 1.6-to-1.7 upgrade. Of > course that won't require an external script. This script is just for > us devs to upgrade our format-18 WCs to format-19. > > It sounds like you are saying this incremental step must be implemented > in line. Is that because the sequence of incremental steps as > implemented in svn_wc__upgrade_sdb() needs to be the same sequence that > is used by the final 1.6-to-1.7 upgrade? > > I was thinking we might want to implement the final 1.6-to-1.7 upgrade > as a direct migration from scattered entries files into a single DB. > That would be potentially be considerably faster and less susceptible to > losing information along the way due to the complexities of multiple > intermediate states. (Such as what we can't represent accurately until > NODE_DATA, for example.) If the DB access functions can be made > sufficiently agnostic of DB location, that should be possible. > > On the other hand, there may be reasons of complexity why we should not > attempt to write a bypass, and there may be reasons of testability. I'm > not sure about that. If so, then of course we'll implement this step as > an in-line auto-upgrade step and expect it to be called as part of the > final 1.6-to-1.7 upgrade sequence. > > What are your thoughts? > > - Julian > > > >
