Re: [PATCH/RFC v3 01/13] Move index v2 specific functions to their own file

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

 



Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> But I think the idea always was that any write that changes the basic
> layout of the file (so that you would read something wrong) will need a
> full rewrite.  Otherwise we're too far in DB land.
>
> Most updates will be
> of the "update the stat and/or sha1 of a file" kind, anyway.

Yes, I agree the v5 format documented in the series does not let you
do anything other than the kind of updates without rewriting [*1*]

But that does not fundamentally change the story that a new format
and a new way to access the index to cope with larger projects would
want to come up with a solution to address the competing read/write
issue, or at least help to make it easier to solve the issue in the
future.

"That problem is not new" is not an answer when the question is "We
still have the problem".


[Footnote]

*1* While my gut feeling matches your guess that the kind of updates
would be the majority, I do not think anybody did numbers to
substanticate it, which we may want to see happen.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]