On 24 November 2014 at 16:53, Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> wrote: > On 24.11.2014 14:28, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> On 21 November 2014 at 19:34, Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> wrote: >>> On 21.11.2014 17:07, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >>>> On 21 November 2014 17:15, Branko Čibej <br...@wandisco.com> wrote: >>>>> On 21.11.2014 14:41, i...@apache.org wrote: >>>>> Why do you want to be able to turn off log addressing, when you can just >>>>> not use FSFSv7 in the first place? >>>>> >>>> This is just a small addition to existing API like >>>> SVN_FS_CONFIG_FSFS_SHARD_SIZE, SVN_FS_CONFIG_FSFS_BLOCK_READ, >>>> SVN_FS_CONFIG_BDB_TXN_NOSYNC etc. It doesn't change user-visible >>>> behavior and I'm planning to use this in the test suite. >>>> >>>> If you have any concerns regarding this change, please let me know. >>> The parameters you mention are all performance-related knobs, so not >>> quite comparable to the change you made. Perhaps a better comparison is >>> the FS layout option (sharded vs. non-sharded, packed vs. unpacked). >>> >> That's not quite true. This API option is similar to the following: >> 1) create a FSFSv6 repository >> 2) upgrade it to the FSFSv7 format. > > I was under the impression that, since r1637184, upgrading from v6 to v7 > without a dump/load cycle is no longer realistic for non-trivial (i.e., > non-empty) repositories? > The 'svnadmin upgrade' command always upgrades to the latest repository format. It leaves marker in FORMAT file if some feature cannot be enabled during in-place upgrade. That's why FORMAT file still have option for non-sharded layout and physical addressing.
-- Ivan Zhakov
