Re: Change set based shallow clone

> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> 
>> >  the impact of changing the
>> > one-file-per-ref implementation to something based on a single
>> > simple databasy file (e.g. gdbm, bdb, sqlite, ...)
>> 
>> One of the complaints against Subversion was that it use BerkeleyDB
>> (bdb) backend... but it was before it acquired fsfs interface. Perhaps
>> we could use it too.
>
> I'm against the latest Berkely DB (Sleepy Cat) implementations.
> Every time I've stored data in them or in applications which use
> them I've lost everything.  GNU dbm might not be too bad.  SQL Lite
> is overkill.
>...
> This is probably something that is easily solved by a simple fixed
> record format holding a 20 byte SHA1 (binary) and a fixed width null
> terminated string holding the ref name, with the records sorted
> by ref name.  Its yet another file format with yet another set of
> utilities needed but we pretty much have those (update-ref).