On 14.05.2011 14:01, Greg Stein wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 04:00, Bert Huijben <b...@qqmail.nl> wrote: >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: zaterdag 14 mei 2011 7:06 >>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1102912 - in /subversion/trunk/subversion: >>> include/private/svn_wc_private.h libsvn_client/prop_commands.c >>> libsvn_wc/externals.c libsvn_wc/wc_db.c tests/libsvn_wc/db-test.c >>> >>> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 18:23, <rhuij...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> Author: rhuijben >>>> Date: Fri May 13 22:22:59 2011 >>>> New Revision: 1102912 >>>> >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1102912&view=rev >>>> Log: >>>> Make the svn_client_proplist3 funtion capable of reading properties from >>>> new style file externals. >>> Huh? I thought file externals had NODES and ACTUAL_NODE rows? >>> Shouldn't the properties be available there? What are we doing >>> *special casing* externals like this? >> See the document you asked me to write: notes/wc-ng/externals >> >> They live in NODES now, but not after we bump to format 29. (They can/will >> probably survive in ACTUAL_NODES as they share the same path anyway) >> >> After we bump to format 29 file externals will be "just like normal >> externals". They won't be part of the parent working copy NODES tree. (And >> can come from different repositories; can be placed in subdirs; etc. etc.). >> >> But of course they will still share the parent wc's db and pristine store as >> they can't have their own administrative area. > I just read it, and I think that I disagree with the approach. > > It now seems that we are going to have to special-check *everywhere* > to see if a node exists as a file external. Every single place we look > for a node, will now require a check to see if a file external lives > at that spot. > > Special casing doesn't seem like a good approach. > > Couldn't you have used a new presence value in the database to note > these? The NODES schema already allows for different repositories > (repos_id). All the data would live in NODES just like every other > item. No need to go and look in a different table (which already looks > much like NODES). > > I'd rather see file externals look more like regular nodes, instead of > some ephemeral thing.
Couldn't agree more. The direction we should be taking is integrating /all/ externals into NODES (eventually), not moving them out. This is going to make all queries into the wc-db even more complex (and slower). -- Brane
