subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Grierson, David" <>
Subject RE: Subversion Windows Performance compared to Linux
Date Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:47:56 GMT
Latency Numbers Every Programmer Should Know:

Always useful to have in mind when considering your benchmarking environment.
David Grierson – SDLC Tools Specialist 
Sky Broadcasting - Customer Business Systems - SDLC Tools
Tel: +44 1506 325100 / Email: / Chatter: CBS SDLC Tools
Watermark Building, Alba Campus, Livingston, EH54 7HH

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nico Kadel-Garcia []
> Sent: 23 April 2014 06:21
> To: Mark Phippard
> Cc: Florian Ludwig;
> Subject: Re: Subversion Windows Performance compared to Linux
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Mark Phippard <> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Florian Ludwig
> <>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> this topic was raised several times in the past - the answers range
> from
> >> "will be better/solved in the next version 1.7" or "it is due to ntfs
> vs
> >> ext3/4" or it's the AV, network setup or the Windows file indexing
> service.
> >> After disabling all those and running a test checkout on Linux and
> Windows
> >> on the same machine I still get a result of Linux being 7.3x times
> faster.
> >> Any ideas why?
> >
> >
> > There are probably some good discussions about this in the archives
> during
> > the run-up to 1.7 but my memories are fading.  I do not think anyone
> ever
> > said that the difference would be "solved" but more that the
> architectural
> > changes in 1.7 were going to close the performance gap on Windows when
> > compared to SVN 1.5/1.6 on Linux.  There were a couple of big
> performance
> > fixes backported to some the later 1.6.x releases so the "win" in 1.7 is
> not
> > as great when compared with 1.6.latest as it is with 1.6.0.
> I remember this. The deadly operation was the initial checkout on
> network based file systems, especially CIFS on the Windows boxes. The
> few servers that ran NFS acted much more like Linux hosts, or like
> Linux hosts usin gNFS. A number of changes in Subversion, over time,
> reduced the perfidious chattiness that hampered CIFS baed checkouts,
> and all Windows users with network mounted working copies became
> *much* happier.
> Let's do be careful to draw distinctions between local file systems,
> like NTFS and ext4, and network file systems like CIFS and NFS. I'm
> afraid it's common to handwave those away as not making a difference,
> and they really do.
>                     Nico Kadel-Garcia

Information in this email including any attachments may be privileged, confidential and is
intended exclusively for the addressee. The views expressed may not be official policy, but
the personal views of the originator. If you have received it in error, please notify the
sender by return e-mail and delete it from your system. You should not reproduce, distribute,
store, retransmit, use or disclose its contents to anyone. Please note we reserve the right
to monitor all e-mail communication through our internal and external networks. SKY and the
SKY marks are trademarks of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky International AG and
are used under licence. British Sky Broadcasting Limited (Registration No. 2906991), Sky-In-Home
Service Limited (Registration No. 2067075) and Sky Subscribers Services Limited (Registration
No. 2340150) are direct or indirect subsidiaries of British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Registration
No. 2247735). All of the companies mentioned in this paragraph are incorporated in England
and Wales and share the same registered office at Grant Way, Isleworth, Middlesex TW7 5QD.
View raw message