subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Naumenko <ro...@naumenko.ca>
Subject Re: Subversion Windows Performance compared to Linux
Date Sat, 26 Apr 2014 21:02:01 GMT
Branko ─îibej said the following, on 25-04-14, 4:26 PM:
> On 25.04.2014 19:09, Roman Naumenko wrote:
>>> That was a known consequence of moving to SQLite for storage of the
>>> metadata. SVN 1.8 offers a solution for those that can use it:
>>> http://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.8.html#exclusivelocking
>> Mark, thank for the link.  There is indeed a nice performance boost to the client
with exclusive access.
> Anyone who insists on using Subversion on NFS, whether as client or 
> server, should be aware of two things:
>
>   * File locking is, at best, flaky on NFS (even NFSv4+); and it's
>     always slow. This will affect the working copy.
>   * NFS does not guarantee that all clients see renames as atomic
>     operations, which affects both working copy and repository, and in
>     the worst case, can cause corruption. This is more likely if you
>     allow both local and remote access to the same files.
>
> In short, no-one should ever assume that NFS behaves as a local file 
> system; and even less complain when it doesn't. To be fair, CIFS isn't 
> much better. Furthermore, these limitations and caveats are not 
> specific to Subversion.
>
> If you absolutely must put your working copies or repositories on 
> non-local storage, you should use a SAN with a real, multi-homed 
> distributed filesystem. Anything else is half-baked, at least as far 
> as data integrity is concerned.
But git clients are doing pretty good on nfs, no?

--Roman

Mime
View raw message