You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@subversion.apache.org by da...@apache.org on 2011/06/07 14:27:04 UTC
svn commit: r1132972 -
/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Author: danielsh
Date: Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011
New Revision: 1132972
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132972&view=rev
Log:
* subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
(i_revision): Remove as duplicate.
Thread: http://mid.gmane.org/877h94hz77.fsf@stat.home.lan
Modified:
subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql?rev=1132972&r1=1132971&r2=1132972&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql (original)
+++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011
@@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
properties BLOB not null);
-create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
+/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
+ CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
+
+ This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
+ its own index.
+ */
+
pragma user_version = 1;
Re: svn commit: r1132972 -
/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de>.
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 21:40:00 +0300:
> Bert Huijben wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 15:09:12 +0200:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: danielsh@apache.org [mailto:danielsh@apache.org]
> > > Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27
> > > To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> > > Subject: svn commit: r1132972 -
> > > /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> > >
> > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7
> > > 12:27:03 2011
> > > @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
> > > create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
> > > properties BLOB not null);
> > >
> > > -create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
> > > +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
> > > + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
> > > +
> > > + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
> > > + its own index.
> > > + */
> > > +
> >
> > Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique?
> >
>
> IIRC there is no functional difference in the case, but I agree that
> spelling out PRIMARY KEY will be better, will look into that.
This time the EXPLAIN's show a significant difference, which to my
untrained eye seems to be in favour of PRIMARY KEY. (They're attached.)
I've made the change in r1133237 (and asked a question in the commit),
but if someone has concerns please voice them.
Re: svn commit: r1132972 -
/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de>.
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 21:40:00 +0300:
> Bert Huijben wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 15:09:12 +0200:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: danielsh@apache.org [mailto:danielsh@apache.org]
> > > Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27
> > > To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> > > Subject: svn commit: r1132972 -
> > > /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> > >
> > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7
> > > 12:27:03 2011
> > > @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
> > > create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
> > > properties BLOB not null);
> > >
> > > -create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
> > > +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
> > > + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
> > > +
> > > + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
> > > + its own index.
> > > + */
> > > +
> >
> > Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique?
> >
>
> IIRC there is no functional difference in the case, but I agree that
> spelling out PRIMARY KEY will be better, will look into that.
This time the EXPLAIN's show a significant difference, which to my
untrained eye seems to be in favour of PRIMARY KEY. (They're attached.)
I've made the change in r1133237 (and asked a question in the commit),
but if someone has concerns please voice them.
Re: svn commit: r1132972 -
/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Bert Huijben wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 15:09:12 +0200:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: danielsh@apache.org [mailto:danielsh@apache.org]
> > Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27
> > To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> > Subject: svn commit: r1132972 -
> > /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> >
> > Author: danielsh
> > Date: Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011
> > New Revision: 1132972
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132972&view=rev
> > Log:
> > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> > (i_revision): Remove as duplicate.
> >
> > Thread: http://mid.gmane.org/877h94hz77.fsf@stat.home.lan
> >
> > Modified:
> > subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> >
> > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> > URL:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/re
> > vprops-db.sql?rev=1132972&r1=1132971&r2=1132972&view=diff
> > ==========================================================
> > ====================
> > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql (original)
> > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7
> > 12:27:03 2011
> > @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
> > create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
> > properties BLOB not null);
> >
> > -create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
> > +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
> > + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
> > +
> > + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
> > + its own index.
> > + */
> > +
>
> Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique?
>
IIRC there is no functional difference in the case, but I agree that
spelling out PRIMARY KEY will be better, will look into that.
> Bert
>
>
Re: svn commit: r1132972 -
/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Bert Huijben wrote on Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 15:09:12 +0200:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: danielsh@apache.org [mailto:danielsh@apache.org]
> > Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27
> > To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> > Subject: svn commit: r1132972 -
> > /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> >
> > Author: danielsh
> > Date: Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011
> > New Revision: 1132972
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132972&view=rev
> > Log:
> > * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> > (i_revision): Remove as duplicate.
> >
> > Thread: http://mid.gmane.org/877h94hz77.fsf@stat.home.lan
> >
> > Modified:
> > subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> >
> > Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> > URL:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/re
> > vprops-db.sql?rev=1132972&r1=1132971&r2=1132972&view=diff
> > ==========================================================
> > ====================
> > --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql (original)
> > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7
> > 12:27:03 2011
> > @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
> > create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
> > properties BLOB not null);
> >
> > -create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
> > +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
> > + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
> > +
> > + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
> > + its own index.
> > + */
> > +
>
> Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique?
>
IIRC there is no functional difference in the case, but I agree that
spelling out PRIMARY KEY will be better, will look into that.
> Bert
>
>
RE: svn commit: r1132972 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Posted by Bert Huijben <be...@qqmail.nl>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: danielsh@apache.org [mailto:danielsh@apache.org]
> Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27
> To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1132972 -
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
>
> Author: danielsh
> Date: Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011
> New Revision: 1132972
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132972&view=rev
> Log:
> * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> (i_revision): Remove as duplicate.
>
> Thread: http://mid.gmane.org/877h94hz77.fsf@stat.home.lan
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/re
> vprops-db.sql?rev=1132972&r1=1132971&r2=1132972&view=diff
> ==========================================================
> ====================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7
> 12:27:03 2011
> @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
> create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
> properties BLOB not null);
>
> -create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
> +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
> + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
> +
> + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
> + its own index.
> + */
> +
Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique?
Bert
RE: svn commit: r1132972 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
Posted by Bert Huijben <be...@qqmail.nl>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: danielsh@apache.org [mailto:danielsh@apache.org]
> Sent: dinsdag 7 juni 2011 14:27
> To: commits@subversion.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r1132972 -
> /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
>
> Author: danielsh
> Date: Tue Jun 7 12:27:03 2011
> New Revision: 1132972
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1132972&view=rev
> Log:
> * subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> (i_revision): Remove as duplicate.
>
> Thread: http://mid.gmane.org/877h94hz77.fsf@stat.home.lan
>
> Modified:
> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
>
> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/re
> vprops-db.sql?rev=1132972&r1=1132971&r2=1132972&view=diff
> ==========================================================
> ====================
> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql (original)
> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs_fs/revprops-db.sql Tue Jun 7
> 12:27:03 2011
> @@ -28,7 +28,13 @@ pragma auto_vacuum = 1;
> create table revprop (revision integer UNIQUE not null,
> properties BLOB not null);
>
> -create index i_revision on revprop (revision);
> +/* Unreleased 1.7-dev libraries also contained an index:
> + CREATE INDEX i_revision ON revprop (revision);
> +
> + This was removed since the UNIQUE statement already constructs
> + its own index.
> + */
> +
Shouldn't revision be the primary key instead of just unique?
Bert