> -Original Message-
> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpil...@collab.net]
> Sent: woensdag 11 mei 2011 3:47
> To: Subversion Development
> Cc: Bert Huijben
> Subject: 'svn revert -R .' claiming false reversions and doing nothing
>
> I noticed the following tonight:
>
>$ svn st
>
I noticed the following tonight:
$ svn st
M subversion/libsvn_ra_neon/fetch.c
$ svn revert -R .
Reverted 'win-tests.py'
Reverted 'notes/merge-tracking/func-spec.html'
Reverted 'notes/merge-tracking/requirements.html'
Reverted 'notes/merge-tracking/design.html'
Reverte
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
> The most recent benchmark suggests that the 'svn delete' performance
> problem I was complaining about earlier is not only gone but completely
> reversed. 'svn delete' is now EXTREMELY fast when compared to 1.6.
>
> Amazing.
>
> Also, one has
> -Original Message-
> From: Bert Huijben [mailto:b...@qqmail.nl]
> Sent: woensdag 11 mei 2011 2:03
> To: 'Daniel Shahaf'; ne...@apache.org; 'Neels Hofmeyr'
> Cc: 'dev'
> Subject: RE: [svnbench] Revision: 1101392 compiled May 10 2011, 10:07:15
>
> > Are you sure? The script's output seem
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Shahaf [mailto:d...@daniel.shahaf.name]
> Sent: woensdag 11 mei 2011 2:01
> To: ne...@apache.org; Neels Hofmeyr
> Cc: dev
> Subject: Re: [svnbench] Revision: 1101392 compiled May 10 2011, 10:07:15
>
> Neels Hofmeyr wrote on Wed, May 11, 2011 at 01:31:0
Neels Hofmeyr wrote on Wed, May 11, 2011 at 01:31:02 +0200:
> The most recent benchmark suggests that the 'svn delete' performance
> problem I was complaining about earlier is not only gone but completely
> reversed. 'svn delete' is now EXTREMELY fast when compared to 1.6.
>
> Amazing.
>
> Also,
The most recent benchmark suggests that the 'svn delete' performance
problem I was complaining about earlier is not only gone but completely
reversed. 'svn delete' is now EXTREMELY fast when compared to 1.6.
Amazing.
Also, one has to look really hard for timings where trunk is slower.
Quite remar
Problem was that the list address was getting rewritten to dev@a.o.
Fixed by tweaking postfix's configuration.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:56:52PM +, ne...@apache.org wrote:
> test mail from the vm
test mail from the vm
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> There have a been a couple of user-requested fixes nominated or
>>> backported to 1.6.17, and there are sever
On 10.05.2011 11:14, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 10.05.2011 10:34, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
On 09.05.2011 18:43, Philip Martin wrote:
stef...@apache.org writes:
Author: stefan2
Date: Mon May 9 16:28:16 2011
New Revision: 1101091
(svn_cache__membuffer_cache_create): formatting fixes; add
missing
On 05/10/2011 02:09 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Yeah, I've found the problem. Just cleaning up the solution now.
r1101580
--
C. Michael Pilato
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 05/10/2011 02:02 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
> "C. Michael Pilato" writes:
>
>> I'm thinking there's a pool lifetime issue or something. I just tried this
>> myself, and got:
>>
>> svn: E160006: No such revision 157327024
>>
>> Methinks that the svn_revnum_t this thing is trying to use at some p
"C. Michael Pilato" writes:
> I'm thinking there's a pool lifetime issue or something. I just tried this
> myself, and got:
>
> svn: E160006: No such revision 157327024
>
> Methinks that the svn_revnum_t this thing is trying to use at some point is
> full of garbage.
Valgrind complains:
==1143
On 05/10/2011 10:57 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:42 AM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>> On 05/09/2011 05:53 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Hyrum K Wright
>>> wrote:
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> A sm
> -Original Message-
> From: Julian Foad [mailto:julian.f...@wandisco.com]
> Sent: maandag 9 mei 2011 22:51
> To: Nick Piper
> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: AW: Python bindings: Use of svn_swig_py_make_stream() -
> avoiding leaking fds
>
> Nick Piper wrote:
> > Add svn_strea
Before we invent another stream API (which isn't a small patch at all,
and has a bunch of design decisions involved AFAICT), can we please
document the semantics of svn_stream_close()? How it interacts with
clearing the stream's pool, whether it's permitted not to call it at
all, and whether it's
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:42 AM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 05/09/2011 05:53 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Hyrum K Wright
>>> wrote:
A small bug I ran across. I'll eventually dig deeper, but if any
On 05/09/2011 05:53 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
>>> A small bug I ran across. I'll eventually dig deeper, but if anybody
>>> has the time, they are welcome to look. This is with a r110
> -Original Message-
> From: Bert Huijben [mailto:b...@qqmail.nl]
> Sent: dinsdag 10 mei 2011 13:58
> To: 'Ivan Zhakov'
> Cc: 'Greg Stein'; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] WC DB verification 1
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ivan Zhakov [mailto:i...@visualsvn.co
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
...
> But there are *a lot* of users who think of svn cleanup as a tool to update
> their recorded_size and recorded_mod time after they unleashed some tool on
> their working copy.
Or after they moved their working copy from A to B without pre
/home/neels/svnbench/20110510-100932
Started at Tue May 10 10:09:32 UTC 2011
-
Results for dir levels: 5 spread: 5
Timings for 5x5_1.6
N min max avgoperation (unit is seconds)
6 595.15 609.60 603.62
> -Original Message-
> From: Ivan Zhakov [mailto:i...@visualsvn.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 10 mei 2011 13:38
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: Greg Stein; dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] WC DB verification 1
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 15:28, Bert Huijben wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -Origin
On 09/05/11 21:51, Julian Foad wrote:
> Nick Piper wrote:
>> Add svn_stream_close_on_cleanup(), which will register a stream to be
>> automatically closed when the pool is destroyed.
>
> First impression: the public name makes it sound like a user-level
> thing, but this is for use by a stream's i
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 15:28, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: dinsdag 10 mei 2011 11:18
>> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] WC DB verification 1
>>
>> >...
>> > I would suggest adding a new function
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 10 mei 2011 11:18
> To: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] WC DB verification 1
>
> >...
> > I would suggest adding a new function for this purpose; and maybe a
> separate
> > program to call
On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 05:29 -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 18:30, Julian Foad wrote:
> > I'm planning to commit the attached wc-db-verification-1.patch, subject
> > to any advice on how to best fit it in to the code base or other
> > concerns, in order to get a DB "self-check" f
On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 11:41 +0200, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 16:50 +0200, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
> > The benchmark will now run once a week on Monday morning and send
> > results directly to dev@. Any objections?
>
> It was supposed to, but I just actively noted that I haven't see
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 16:50 +0200, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
> The benchmark will now run once a week on Monday morning and send
> results directly to dev@. Any objections?
It was supposed to, but I just actively noted that I haven't seen any
for quite a while. I'm now fixing stuff I broke in the scrip
I'd like to drop a hint at
notes/tree-conflicts/all-add-vs-add-tree-conflicts.txt
where I tabled up the TC cases that I changed. AFAIR it wasn't quite
where I wanted it when my activity faded, so unless others have covered
the ':(' cases, they are IMHO still inconsistent.
I did what I did beca
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 18:30, Julian Foad wrote:
> I'm planning to commit the attached wc-db-verification-1.patch, subject
> to any advice on how to best fit it in to the code base or other
> concerns, in order to get a DB "self-check" function started.
>
> I think we need something like this. Ea
>...
> I would suggest adding a new function for this purpose; and maybe a separate
> program to call it for our beta cycle.
Please... not another program. There was also a recent call for 'svn
upgrade' to be separate. It really sucks to have an installation smear
a dozen programs into your system
On 10.05.2011 10:34, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote:
> On 09.05.2011 18:43, Philip Martin wrote:
>> stef...@apache.org writes:
>>
>>> Author: stefan2
>>> Date: Mon May 9 16:28:16 2011
>>> New Revision: 1101091
>>>(svn_cache__membuffer_cache_create): formatting fixes; add
>>> missing cast
>>> - c = apr
On May 10, 2011 4:39 AM, "Stefan Fuhrmann" wrote:
>
> On 09.05.2011 19:58, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> On May 9, 2011 12:36 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> Author: stefan2
>>> Date: Mon May 9 16:36:28 2011
>>> New Revision: 1101102
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1101102&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Fix c
Stefan Fuhrmann writes:
> On 09.05.2011 18:43, Philip Martin wrote:
>> stef...@apache.org writes:
>>
>>> Author: stefan2
>>> Date: Mon May 9 16:28:16 2011
>>> New Revision: 1101091
>>>(svn_cache__membuffer_cache_create): formatting fixes; add missing cast
>>> - c = apr_palloc(pool, segment_
On 09.05.2011 19:58, Greg Stein wrote:
On May 9, 2011 12:36 PM, wrote:
Author: stefan2
Date: Mon May 9 16:36:28 2011
New Revision: 1101102
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1101102&view=rev
Log:
Fix conversion and signedness comparison warnings concerning the "fuzz"
factor. That value is
On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 02:12 +0200, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markp...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: dinsdag 10 mei 2011 1:16
> > To: Julian Foad
> > Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] WC DB verification 1
> >
> > Could we tie i
On 09.05.2011 18:43, Philip Martin wrote:
stef...@apache.org writes:
Author: stefan2
Date: Mon May 9 16:28:16 2011
New Revision: 1101091
(svn_cache__membuffer_cache_create): formatting fixes; add missing cast
- c = apr_palloc(pool, segment_count * sizeof(*c));
+ c = (svn_membuffer_t *)apr
"Markus Schaber" writes:
>> Von: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.mar...@wandisco.com]
>>
>> I don't know if we can use that for bindf as I'm not sure if it would
>> handle our "t" that consumes two arguments, but until we have some
>> sort of automatic checking the fewer format letters the better.
Hi, Philip,
> Von: Philip Martin [mailto:philip.mar...@wandisco.com]
> > To do that, I would need to introduce an additional type letter into
> > the "bindf" format, because some parameters will still need to be
> > int64_t
>
> I think that is a bad idea unless there is some way to automatically
40 matches
Mail list logo
