Tino Schwarze wrote on Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:12:08 +0200: > > > It looks like there are revisions which refer to future revisions. > > > > That's... weird. > > > > > Did I > > > miss something? I've seen rep-cache.db hanging around - might this have > > > caused problems since it still contained references to revisions I've > > > removed? According to > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/structure > > > it is safe to remove the rep-cache.db I'd just lose representation > > > sharing for my testing repository, right? > > > > You will lose the ability for future revisions to re-use the reps > > indexed in the database. Existing rep sharing will not be affected. > > > > If you'd like to disable rep-sharing, then use the fsfs.conf file, or > > create a format-3 filesystem (via 'svnadmin create --pre-1.5-compatible') > > I don't want to disable rep-sharing. I just wondered whether rep-sharing > might have introduce these pointers to future revisions since there > might have been references to 115310 in rep-cache.db which got reused? >
Reference to rN are added to the DB at the time rN is committed. I don't see how forward-pointing references are possible. > Maybe I'll try removing >115278 again, then delete rep-cache.db, then > perform all those steps again... > Disable rep-sharing via the config file, too. Otherwise, the DB will be re-created and whatever conflict you have between r115301 and r115310 will re-surface, since both of them are inside the replayed range. > Thanks, > > Tino. > > -- > "What we nourish flourishes." - "Was wir nähren erblüht." > > www.tisc.de
