Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 19:28:01 +0200: > I'd consider the branch done as soon as both backends store successors > of each node-revision, and are able to return the list of immediate > successors of a given node-revision. We must also have some basic unit > tests to show that it works. > > At that point I'd like to merge into trunk and continue development there. >
Works for me. > > The branch doesn't have yet > > > > - consumers of these new APIs > > One other remaining item is in-place upgrades. > I'd like to optionally support in-place upgrades instead of requiring > users to dump/load. I'll look into upgrades then. For FSFS I imagine having an external tool to populate the cache -- i.e., format 6 will mean "/can/ have a successors cache", but there will be an additional bit saying "the successors cache is up to date". I'll also look into BDB, but I'm not sure offhand what to suggest there.
