mirrors/git-annex
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages1 Wiki Activity Actions

Added a comment

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Stan 2016-06-28 23:10:07 +00:00 • committed by admin
parent 543cd33940
commit 037b9efde2
1 changed files with 17 additions and 0 deletions

17
doc/forum/v5_to_v6_upgrade_strategy/comment_2_ef2648a58037b867e2d745eb4b3a15a2._comment Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
[[!comment format=mdwn
username="Stan"
subject="comment 2"
date="2016-06-28T23:10:07Z"
content="""
Many thanks for the reply. I did not add too much detail to my post as it was my first, and I was a bit shy.
I did do all of the steps indicated re v6. The binary has been fine for me also.
My question is a bit more complex as I am looking to apply v6 at some point to a set of distributed repos. Essentially it has the typical duplicated system topology: 2 remotes, several clients, each of which is linked to both remotes. Thus it will survive multiple failure scenarios.
I would be looking at the strategy of the order of repo upgrade. Say, a client first, and run a set of tests. And so on. Remotes last perhaps.
In any case I built a test bed as above and have been experimenting with a single client at a v6 repo.
So far it has been smooth, but right now I seem to be stuck where thinning is not having any effect: I still have a particular big file (1.5GB) in both the annex and the working dir. Lock remove the big file from the working dir, and leaves a link, and unlock restores the big file in the working dir. Yet, the annex still contains the big file no matter what. I was under the expectation that one of the big file copies would go away.
"""]]