Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> writes: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:29:59PM +0000, Philip Martin wrote: >> I put in the ORDER BY to preserve the parents before children >> notification used by 1.6. I wonder if that notification order is >> important? > > See r1196191. > It should preserve the 1.6.x order (via svn_path_compare_paths()). > >> A patch that we could commit without affecting the order is: >> >> Index: subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql >> =================================================================== >> --- subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql (revision 1196106) >> +++ subversion/libsvn_wc/wc-queries.sql (working copy) >> @@ -1193,7 +1193,7 @@ >> CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE delete_list ( >> /* ### we should put the wc_id in here in case a delete spans multiple >> ### working copies. queries, etc will need to be adjusted. */ >> - local_relpath TEXT PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL >> + local_relpath TEXT PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL UNIQUE >> ) > > Interesting. Can you explain why this doesn't affect order?
Because I retained ORDER BY in the select statement. > I guess this works because there is only one column in the table? > Do UNIQUE columns happen to be inserted, or selected, in sorted order? UNIQUE simple means that an index is created so the ORDER BY is fast. -- Philip
