On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Andreas Kupries <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok, is that something which can be fixed by rewriting key pieces of > SQL and/or C ? > There's no current way (other than the new vtable) to get the files for a given version via SQL, so that'd have to be done in conjunction with manifest parsing, i.e. C. Or we write an SQL routine like file_is_changed(name) and reimplement 'update' and friends to use the new vtable? (i'm just speculating - don't know if that's reasonable/feasible.) > I.e. the command implementation would have to detect the unchanged > files on update and skip them. > Which would almost certainly once in a blue moon, as a side-effect of external forces, have a false negative and cause grief? The current behaviour is "slow but sure," but obviously inadequate (or "over-adequate") for massive repos. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
