Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 11.01.2011 16:01, Julian Foad wrote:
> >> I see a different issue here: The close_wcroot() call is normally
> >> handled from pool cleanup for users of the svn_client api. (The
> >> svn_wc_context_t is cached in the client context, which is only closed
> >> on pool cleanup)
On 11.01.2011 16:01, Julian Foad wrote:
>> I see a different issue here: The close_wcroot() call is normally
>> handled from pool cleanup for users of the svn_client api. (The
>> svn_wc_context_t is cached in the client context, which is only closed
>> on pool cleanup).
> Thanks for pointing that
On Tue, 2011-01-11, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/11/2011 09:19 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > I think it would be an embarrassing regression. Only a few people would
> > ever actually bother to read the release notes and do regular "svn
> > cleanup"s before their disks fill up.
>
> I dunno about
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:07 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/11/2011 09:01 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:43 AM, C. Michael Pilato
>> wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2011 08:20 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
I'm not 100% sure whether close_wcroot() is the best place to delete
u
ght
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH in progress] Ref-counting for pristine texts
> >
> > On 01/11/2011 08:20 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > > I'm not 100% sure whether close_wcroot() is the best place to delete
> > > unreferenced pristines. Review of the concept would be u
On 01/11/2011 09:19 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> I think it would be an embarrassing regression. Only a few people would
> ever actually bother to read the release notes and do regular "svn
> cleanup"s before their disks fill up.
I dunno about "regression". My 1.6 working copies routinely have many,
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 09:01 -0500, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:43 AM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
> > On 01/11/2011 08:20 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> >> I'm not 100% sure whether close_wcroot() is the best place to delete
> >> unreferenced pristines. Review of the concept would
On 01/11/2011 09:01 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:43 AM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>> On 01/11/2011 08:20 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>>> I'm not 100% sure whether close_wcroot() is the best place to delete
>>> unreferenced pristines. Review of the concept would be useful here
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:43 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/11/2011 08:20 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
>> I'm not 100% sure whether close_wcroot() is the best place to delete
>> unreferenced pristines. Review of the concept would be useful here, in
>> comparison with other options such as deletin
> -Original Message-
> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net]
> Sent: dinsdag 11 januari 2011 14:44
> To: Julian Foad
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org; Philip Martin; Hyrum K Wright
> Subject: Re: [PATCH in progress] Ref-counting for pristine texts
>
>
On 01/11/2011 08:20 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure whether close_wcroot() is the best place to delete
> unreferenced pristines. Review of the concept would be useful here, in
> comparison with other options such as deleting after flushing the work
> queue or at some other place.
Just
On Tue, 2011-01-11, Julian Foad wrote:
> The complete patch (with log message) is attached. Any review would be
> appreciated.
To be more specific:
I'm happy with the way this patch uses triggers to inc and dec the ref
counts. Review of impl details here would be appreciated.
I'm not 100% sure
The complete patch (with log message) is attached. Any review would be
appreciated.
> I have tried some timing comparisons and can't even see a difference.
My test WC consisted of 10 identical directories, each containing 1000
different text files, each consisting of a single line "Hello NNN" wh
On Sat, 2011-01-08, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 15:19 +, Philip Martin wrote:
> >> Julian Foad writes:
> >>
> >> > The only case that SQLite doesn't handle automatically is the
> >> > replacement part of "INSERT OR REPL
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 15:19 +, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Julian Foad writes:
>>
>> > The only case that SQLite doesn't handle automatically is the
>> > replacement part of "INSERT OR REPLACE INTO ...": it doesn't fire the
>> > "delete" trigg
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 15:19 +, Philip Martin wrote:
> Julian Foad writes:
>
> > The only case that SQLite doesn't handle automatically is the
> > replacement part of "INSERT OR REPLACE INTO ...": it doesn't fire the
> > "delete" trigger in that case.
>
> http://www.sqlite.org/lang_conflict.h
Julian Foad writes:
> The only case that SQLite doesn't handle automatically is the
> replacement part of "INSERT OR REPLACE INTO ...": it doesn't fire the
> "delete" trigger in that case.
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_conflict.html
suggests that you need to enable recursive triggers.
I suspect t
I'm implementing ref-counting for pristine texts, with the aim of
deleting any text whose ref-count reaches zero. The current situation
without this work is that many pristine texts are not deleted when they
become unreferenced, and they accumulate in the pristine store until the
user runs "svn cl
18 matches
Mail list logo
