Chris Withers wrote at 2006-10-4 15:06 +0100:
... The interesting thing is that it looks like the transactions where the time appears to go backwards are duplicates of earlier transactions:
position in file tid time from tid 31025376233 0x03689abb582f1311 2006-10-03 04:43:20.668098 31025376508 0x03689abdbbe5f000 2006-10-03 04:45:44.038639 31025376783 0x03689abddbe6be55 2006-10-03 04:45:51.539377
...lots of transactions...
31025646913 0x03689abb582f1311 2006-10-03 04:43:20.668098 31025647188 0x03689abdbbe5f000 2006-10-03 04:45:44.038639 31025647463 0x03689abddbe6be55 2006-10-03 04:45:51.539377
Would this seem to be an accurate reading of the attached log?
It looks as if you had given the same incremental file twice to "repozo".
1. Could repozo have a bug that resulted in this?
Maybe, especially when the same file is twice integrated
2. If repozo has no bug, should it have checking that makes sure it doesn't build insane .fs files, or is fstest the way to go for that?
As "fstest" found this problem, it was not too bad.
3. If repozo is not to blame, what could be?
One possibility would be a bad call. -- Dieter