CHK nodes and check

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Robert Collins wrote:
> currently check cannot [reliably] autodetect the format of CHK nodes.
> This is because each node can be either a parent-basename map node or a
> fileid-entry map node.
> 
> Its possible to change check to keep a lookaside set listing where nodes
> came from to allow them to be processed properly regardless, but it
> would be more robust if we identified all the content in the CHK pages
> such that they can be scanned without the higher level nodes being
> present. This is [obviously] a format change.
> 
> While its not mandatory to do this for 2.0, I think it would be better
> to do it...
> 
> -Rob

I'm pretty sure check needs to verify things from the top-down anyway,
so I don't quite see what check gains by knowing whether a node is a
parent-basename or fileid-entry just from the raw bytes.

If you have something specific, I'd like to hear it. It sounds like you
might have something and I'm just missing it.

Why aren't you walking top down, tracking what references are present,
and what is missing? Certainly you can then seem what nodes are extra
that aren't referenced.

Perhaps you are trying to do check in disk-sorted IO. If you batch it
well enough, it should do pretty well regardless.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAko3BfYACgkQJdeBCYSNAANNkACfcUQ5L2Dw/ZoWjRIkDJwTeYaB
z8UAoKHU4+c82p8ULLivzWHWC2yiwFJA
=z0Av
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----