Unknow state: can it be examined

Thomas Linder Puls · Post by **Thomas Linder Puls** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:26 pm

Hi there, we are two companies that work to gether on several rather large projects. One company in Russia and one in Denmark. The network connection between the companies is at best 2Mbit/sec.

We intend to have the Vault database in Denmark. The data tree is rather large 150MB+ in 8.000+ files in 800+ folders. (Perhaps we can cut it down, but it will still be quite large). This does not even include our 14.000+ (small) test files, and our 28.000+ (small) test results.

It seems rather silly if all developers in Russia should download all these files from the Vault server. It will also take rather long time, and cost something (the Russian company pays for traffic).

So it would seem much more natural just to place all the files on the relevant machines (the files are already in Russia).

I have however noticed that Vault considers such files to have "unknown" status. And that "Get Latest.." will fetch a fresh version (i.e. it makes no difference that you actually have the file already, you get it from Vault anyway).

Is there a way to change the status of such files (besides "Get Latest.."). Perhaps Vault can somehow be asked to examine the "unknown" files to see if they are indeed up-to-date. File-size and check-sum (or something like that) would be more than enough to satisfy me. Actually, I would for this start-up accept a complete "cheat" of Vault.

GregM · Post by **GregM** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:12 pm

I don't think there's any way until 2.1:

http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic.php?p=6973#6973

Much improved handling of files in status "unknown"

Post by **jeremy_sg** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:15 pm

Thomas,

As gregm pointed out, there will be much better handling of unknown status in 2.1. There might be a way to work around the problem for 2.0, but it would still be fairly complicated. I hope that when 2.1 if beta, you'll be willing to test this new functionality to see if it works like you want it to.

Thomas Linder Puls · Post by **Thomas Linder Puls** » Thu Oct 07, 2004 11:51 pm

Yes, we would like to test this feature when it is in beta, if we can test it without destroying our database.