On Sun, Dec 04, 2016 at 09:23:37PM +0100, Karel Gardas wrote: > On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@bec.de> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 04, 2016 at 08:50:44PM +0100, Karel Gardas wrote: > >> Otherwise as Nikita recommended, switching off repo checksums helps a > >> lot, but then make sure you are on the filesystem like ZFS/btrfs which > >> does that for you transparently and you do not need to do that on the > >> fossil side. > > > > Eh, no. You do not need a file system with automatic hashing. Every > > single file is still recorded by checksum in Fossil. It is not what the > > repo checksum option does. > > Errhmm, thanks for correction. Am I right that repo checksum switched > on means that modified files will be those where checksum stored and > checksum computed from the file on fs is different? And once you > switch that off, you rely purely on comparison of modification time on > file in fs and I guess stored modif time in repo db? If so, then > indeed I've been completely mistaken and thank you very much for your > kind correction. If however I'm still off, I would appreciate > reference to some material explaining repo/chksums business in fossil.
No. What repo checksum does is compute a separate checksum over the concatenation of all files. Joerg _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
