Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Mon, 03 Mar 2014 13:27:53 -0800] rev 830
exchange: have a function doing all the common initial setup
This will help creation of further test.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Mon, 03 Mar 2014 13:12:50 -0800] rev 829
exchance: add a common setup script for all test
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:36:37 -0800] rev 828
exchange: add test case for A.2
Testcase defined here: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ObsolescenceMarkersExchange
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:21:22 -0800] rev 827
exchange: add test case for A.1
Testcase defined here: http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ObsolescenceMarkersExchange
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:45:59 -0800] rev 826
exchange: add the pullmarker wireproto command to simple4server
This will allow simple server side support.
(yes, code duplication is bad I already told you I won't do it too much mom)
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:44:37 -0800] rev 825
exchange: extract computation of pulled markers boundary in a function
I expect massive experimentation on this specific aspect. so we better isolate
it.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:38:19 -0800] rev 824
exchange: pull markers relevant to the pulled subset only
With the command recently introduced we can select to pull only markers relevant
to some nodes. We are now pull all markers for all node in the relevant subset.
We'll try to pull less (just markers for node where local and remote marker
diverge) later, but we need some marker discovery mechanism for that. which are
not easy.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:25:34 -0800] rev 823
exchange: add a new method to pull markers
It has both local and wire protocol implementation. This command does not
requires escaping of the marker and are expecting to me highly faster than the
pushkey method.
The other main point is that command is to accept a `heads` and `common`
argument to select to pull changeset only relevant to a set a of node.
We are not using this capability yet but we'll do it soon
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:55:34 -0800] rev 822
exchange: add the pushmarker wireproto command to simple4server
This will allow simple server side support.
(yes, code duplication is bad, I won't do it too much mom)
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:40:29 -0800] rev 821
exchange: introduce a wireprotocol command to push markers
Pushkey is not adapted to transmit a stream of binary data. We used it as a hack
so far. We add a new wire protocol command to speed the things up (and also push
all the markers in a single transaction). The proper way to do it is to
introduce bundle2 in core, but this will already help in the mean time.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:30:10 -0800] rev 820
exchange: actually use _pushkeyescape fallback
The code was still calling `obsolete._pushkeyescape` therefore never calling the
fallback we defined. Now that we call it, it had to be fixed to actually work
too.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:28:43 -0800] rev 819
merge with stable
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:27:42 -0800] rev 818
prune: accept '0 0' as a valide --date value
I 've no idea why 4c0f6d555032 introduced it with this check.
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@fb.com> [Thu, 27 Feb 2014 19:58:08 -0800] rev 817
exchange: only push the set of marker relevant to want we push
We now compute all markers relevant to pushed set. And just send just those one.
So you are no longer pushing markers that point to changeset your are not
pushing. See the in line comment for details about what "relevant" is.
Multiple nice output have been added in the process.