On 2014-01-13 08:27:34 +, Markus Schaber wrote:
> > On 2014-01-13 03:51:08 +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > > On 13.01.2014 03:43, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > > I meant deltas like in the repository (but see below).
> > >
> > > When you say "delta" you have to also define "against what". Otherwi
Hi,
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Vincent Lefevre [mailto:vincent-...@vinc17.net]
> Gesendet: Montag, 13. Januar 2014 04:17
> An: dev@subversion.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: svn cleanup and unreferenced pristines
>
> On 2014-01-13 03:51:08 +0100, Branko Čibej wro
On 2014-01-13 03:51:08 +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 13.01.2014 03:43, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > I meant deltas like in the repository (but see below).
>
> When you say "delta" you have to also define "against what". Otherwise
> it's just a not very efficient compression algorithm.
Against ano
On 13.01.2014 03:43, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-01-11 22:38:51 +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 11.01.2014 10:30, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>>> Moreover if you want to speed up things, keeping pristines may not
>>> be the right way (in particular if the whole files are kept, not
>>> deltas).
>>
On 2014-01-11 22:38:51 +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 11.01.2014 10:30, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Moreover if you want to speed up things, keeping pristines may not
> > be the right way (in particular if the whole files are kept, not
> > deltas).
>
> FWIW, you can't reasonably store pristines as
On 11.01.2014 10:30, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-01-10 14:11:08 -0500, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> Just a reminder that there can be performance benefits to not being too
>> aggressive in our pristine purging, since update-style operations will
>> consult the pristine cache before slurping fil
On 2014-01-10 14:11:08 -0500, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Just a reminder that there can be performance benefits to not being too
> aggressive in our pristine purging, since update-style operations will
> consult the pristine cache before slurping file contents from the
> server.
If the working cop
On 11.01.2014 01:02, Ben Reser wrote:
> On 1/10/14, 3:17 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> We could even not add an option, and instead only remove pristines that are
>> "old enough"; e.g., touch the file timestamp every time a pristine file is
>> used, and have "svn cleanup" only remove those prisitines
On 1/10/14, 3:17 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> We could even not add an option, and instead only remove pristines that are
> "old enough"; e.g., touch the file timestamp every time a pristine file is
> used, and have "svn cleanup" only remove those prisitines that haven't been
> used for a certain peri
On 10.01.2014 20:11, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 01/10/2014 02:00 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
>> Wish that cleaning up pristines hadn't been overloaded into cleanup. Ran
>> into
>> a situation where I crashed the client today. So I needed to run cleanup,
>> but
>> I hadn't run cleanup in a very long
On 01/10/2014 02:00 PM, Ben Reser wrote:
> Wish that cleaning up pristines hadn't been overloaded into cleanup. Ran into
> a situation where I crashed the client today. So I needed to run cleanup, but
> I hadn't run cleanup in a very long time so of course it took a while since it
> also went thr
Wish that cleaning up pristines hadn't been overloaded into cleanup. Ran into
a situation where I crashed the client today. So I needed to run cleanup, but
I hadn't run cleanup in a very long time so of course it took a while since it
also went through all the pristines to cleanup the unreference
12 matches
Mail list logo
