On Dec 12, 2003, at 2:45 AM, Mike Mason wrote:
> Ryan Hunt wrote:
>> While disk space is cheep my WC will be 5TB before year end next year
>> if all goes well. Even using Apple XRaids, which are the cheapest
>> per GB around, it would cost $25,000 for each additional WC. Not
>> something I will be able to get pushed through the budget with out
>> some mission critical cause.
>
> Your working copy is 5TB and you need to access all of it all of the
> time? You couldn't check out just the portion you're working on (or
> that each person is working on) ? I can't help but think that you're
> trying to do something here that traditional source-control isn't mean
> to do. I'm very interested in understanding more about the "big WC
> needs to be shared" scenario, since several people have mentioned it.
Well, I can't speak for others, but my needs for the "big WC needs to
be shared" scenario is for multiple maintainers to be able to work on
and maintain a tree of disk images which can be anywhere from 300MB-2GB
each. Because of the size it doesn't make sense to have multiple WC's
. I need access to it all of it all of the time because all of the
disk images in the WC are going to be live and actively used by
potentially as many as 500-1000 users simultaneously.
In my case NAS snapshots were postulated as an alternative, however,
this is not feasible due to the large amount of space this would
require, and its inherent inflexibility. The specific features of SVN
that are attractive in my situation are: cheap branching and copying,
the ability to revert to any revision of a disk image, the ability to
rapidly undo changes that were made using svn revert, and the ability
to track changes made via the log mechanism.
-Ryan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 12 14:20:06 2003