Hi Philipp, 2011/5/12 P.Marek <[email protected]>: >> I think I found a bug in fsvs 1.2.3, please confirm or confute it: >> >> $ svnadmin create ~/svnr/repo1 >> >> $ mkdir etc{1,2} >> $ ( cd etc1 && fsvs url >> name:repo1,prio:10,target:HEAD,ro:0,file:///root/svnr/repo1 ) >> $ ( cd etc2 && fsvs url >> name:repo1,prio:10,target:HEAD,ro:0,file:///root/svnr/repo1 ) >> >> etc1$ echo data >testfile1 && fsvs ci -m 1st >> N... 5 testfile1 >> committed revision 1 on 2011-05-11T16:56:36.772102Z as root >> >> etc2$ fsvs rem >> N... 0 testfile1 >> ..C. dir . >> Remote-status against revision 1. > Try "fsvs update" here, that should give you the file. > > But you're right; using multiple WCs with FSVS might easily make problems. > A repo-path should have only one _modifying_ WC.
Is it hard to fix? We're planning to use fsvs to keep our cluster nodes in sync. Fsvs should be as transparent for the administrators as possible, if they can make changes in only one working set, I have to fight with them till my last blood. :) I've C experience, but only limited time - worth to try? > If you really want to handle the same repository-directory, always use "fsvs > update" > before committing. Sounds like a reasonable workaround if proper fix isn't possible. (IMHO it's a critical bug for everyone who uses fsvs to keep cluster nodes in sync, because a node can outdate without any warning and that can cause annoying hard-to-find problems in the services of the load balanced cluster. Maybe you should put a message about it under "KNOWN BUGS" or "LIMITATIONS" section in the fsvs man page.) ------------------------------------------------------ http://fsvs.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=3928&dsMessageId=2735047 To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]].
