Database consistency after a successful pull
- From
- McMullan, Jason <jason.mcmullan@timesys.com>
- Date
- Jun 6, 2005, 13:50 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1118065849.8970.37.camel@jmcmullan.timesys>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.21.0506051523280.30848-100000@iabervon.org>
Subject Was: [PATCH] pull: gracefu[PAlly recover from delta retrieval failure.]
[snip lots of really good information about the thinking behind the design of the pull mechanisms ]
Ok, so would I be correct in the following assumptions about the validity of a 'consistent' .git/objects database:
============================================================
Commits: * May have the tree they refer to in the database * Must have their parents in the database
Trees: * Must have the blobs they refer to in the database * Must have the trees they refer to in the database
Deltas: * Must have the referred to object in the database
Blobs: * No references to check
============================================================
In short, the database would contain:
* The entire commit history * Selected commits would have the entire tree available
Correct, or totally mistaken? If mistaken, what are the consitency rules?
[Oh, and does PGP signing my messages bug anybody? If so, I can stop doing that on this list]
-- Jason McMullan <jason.mcmullan@timesys.com> TimeSys Corporation