[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Fast commits

From: Robin Farine
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Fast commits
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 18:23:48 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040306)

Tom Lord wrote:

Yup.  There's no rocket science here.  We can prune and perhaps
restore in very automatable and handy ways (dozens of lines of new
code).  But it's kind of a chicken-and-egg problem from my
perspective, at the moment ---  I kind of want to run head-on into the
theoretical problem first hand before I pick the dozens of lines of
code needed to solve it.

Not very theoretical and you probably already considered a similar alternative, but I just wonder whether this could work without adding too much complexity and avoid the need for log pruning.

Currently, we have {arch}/<p>/.../patch-log/<logK> where <logK> contains the complete log message for the change set. This causes the computation time of a change set to increase proportionally to the number of patch logs in the version.

Let us suppose we replace the patch-log directory with three files. One for applied patches from this version, a second that lists continuations and a third containing the full log text of the last revision.

The format of the first files could be a sequence of patch numbers or intervals of patch numbers:

   [p0,pK], pK+2, [pK+4,pL],...

The second file contains a sequence of key - value pairs for continuation (tag) revisions

   0: <archive>/<project>--<branch>--<version>--<patch>

The third file contains the full log message of the last patch, thus getting the log message of an anterior revision would require an access to the archive or to a revision library. But I assume it would not happen during commit or merge operations.

Agreed, the handling of these files would probably not be as simple as it is currently for the patch logs but it does not seem to be extremely complex either.

Does something like this deserve some more thoughts for a future version of the archive/working dir formats?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]