On 3.4.12 13:36, Michael Dürig wrote: > 10 minutes (like any value) seems quite arbitrary to me. I wouldn't want to > fix deployments by fiddling around with this. Rather should clients be > empowered to specify how long they need a certain revision (e.g. by a lease > model as Jukka proposed).
> If a deployment runs out of space because the client application holds on to > too many revisions for too long, this can be fixed by optimising the client > and adjusting the store size to the actual client's requirements. I don't like the idea in general, that a server compontent relies on clients to behave "well" or things will break. As you said, we don't have any conclusive figures yet, how fast things will grow in the revision store. It is just my gut feeling, that keeping revisions around as long as they're accessed, will generate other problems if we don't have a hard limit on a revision's overall lifetime. Dominique
