Hi Hyrum, On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Hyrum K Wright <hy...@hyrumwright.org>wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Peter Samuelson <pe...@p12n.org> wrote: > > > > [Ivan Zhakov] > >> It should be easy to implement editing revprops without using SQLite: > >> in case someone modify revprop non-packed revprop file is created, in > >> read operation non-packed revprop file should be considered as more > >> up-to-date. In next svnadmin pack operation these non-packed files > >> should be merged back to packed one. > > > > +1. This would basically mean there's only _one_ code path for writing > > revprops, yes? 'svnadmin pack' gets a little more complex, but the > > rest of libsvn_fs_fs gets simpler. > > > > Anyone have time to actually do this? Converting the packed format > > from sqlite to the same format used for packed revs would be a bonus. > > I like this idea, but it would seem to introduce an additional stat() > call* for every attempt to fetch a revprop, because you'd first have > to check the "old" location, and then the packed one. As far as I can > see, you'd have to do this in every case; in other words, there isn't > a single-stat() short cut for the common case of non-edited revprops. > > -Hyrum > > * - I don't know why we seem to have this obsession with stat() calls > around here, but it appears to have rubbed off on me. > Well, we've been able to increase working copy performance throughout the lifetime of libsvn_wc-1 by working out ways to reduce the number of apr_stat() calls. I'm not aware there's a huge reason to do that on the server side though.... Bye, Erik.
