Philip Martin writes:
> I'd like to enable NODES as a replacement for BASE_NODE and
> WORKING_NODE. This would involve bumping the format number, and old
> working copies would get automatically upgraded.
This has been committed to trunk.
--
Philip
Daniel Shahaf writes:
> Okay, but I can do the f16->f18 upgrade using head of trunk, right?
Yes, as far as I know. None of that code has changed.
--
Philip
Philip Martin wrote on Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 20:31:56 +0100:
> Daniel Shahaf writes:
>
> >> Greg Stein writes:
> >>
> >> > What about upgrades from f10 or f19?
> >>
> >> Upgrading from 1.6 works just as well with NODES as with BASE/WORKING,
> >> we write NODES with op_depth 0 or 2. Ugrading fr
Daniel Shahaf writes:
>> Greg Stein writes:
>>
>> > What about upgrades from f10 or f19?
>>
>> Upgrading from 1.6 works just as well with NODES as with BASE/WORKING,
>> we write NODES with op_depth 0 or 2. Ugrading from wcng 19 to 20 is
>> very simple, we just copy into NODES with op_depth 0
Philip Martin wrote on Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 19:00:58 +0100:
> Greg Stein writes:
>
> > What about upgrades from f10 or f19?
>
> Upgrading from 1.6 works just as well with NODES as with BASE/WORKING,
> we write NODES with op_depth 0 or 2. Ugrading from wcng 19 to 20 is
> very simple, we just cop
Greg Stein writes:
> What about upgrades from f10 or f19?
Upgrading from 1.6 works just as well with NODES as with BASE/WORKING,
we write NODES with op_depth 0 or 2. Ugrading from wcng 19 to 20 is
very simple, we just copy into NODES with op_depth 0 or 2.
--
Philip
What about upgrades from f10 or f19?
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 04:32, Philip Martin wrote:
> I'd like to enable NODES as a replacement for BASE_NODE and
> WORKING_NODE. This would involve bumping the format number, and old
> working copies would get automatically upgraded.
>
> This is not the final
> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Huelsmann [mailto:ehu...@gmail.com]
> Sent: woensdag 6 oktober 2010 17:46
> To: Julian Foad
> Cc: Philip Martin; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Format 20 upgrade to NODES
>
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Julian F
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 09:32 +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
>> I'd like to enable NODES as a replacement for BASE_NODE and
>> WORKING_NODE. This would involve bumping the format number, and old
>> working copies would get automatically upgraded.
>
"Hyrum K. Wright" writes:
> wrote:
>>
>> The disadvantages include: a wc upgrade, the testsuite is slightly
>> (maybe 2% on my machine) slower.
>
> Are there any explanations for this behavior?
I haven't profiled it. It could be the NODES queries that do
"op_depth = (SELECT MAX(op_depth)" as t
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:32 AM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> I'd like to enable NODES as a replacement for BASE_NODE and
> WORKING_NODE. This would involve bumping the format number, and old
> working copies would get automatically upgraded.
>
> This is not the final NODES data model. It currently jus
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 09:32 +0100, Philip Martin wrote:
> I'd like to enable NODES as a replacement for BASE_NODE and
> WORKING_NODE. This would involve bumping the format number, and old
> working copies would get automatically upgraded.
+1 from me, ASAP.
We're still working on the op_depth sup
I'd like to enable NODES as a replacement for BASE_NODE and
WORKING_NODE. This would involve bumping the format number, and old
working copies would get automatically upgraded.
This is not the final NODES data model. It currently just uses
NODES.op_depth as 0 or 2 to indicate the equivalent of B
13 matches
Mail list logo
