On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Julian Foad <julianfoad_at_btopenworld.com> wrote:
> Ashod Nakashian wrote:
>> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>> In short: if 'mount -o compress=yes' provides 90% space savings then
>>> would have little reason to implement space-saving solutions in svn itself.
>>> But it's the user's, not svn's, responsibility to run that.
> By the way, Daniel, I'm not ruling out the possibility that we may want to provide some glue logic so that Subversion can help the user to set up the feature. Without such assistance, only expert users would ever benefit.
But perhaps only expert users *need* the benefit.
Subversion has always been a system that is easy to deploy and admin,
particularly for the small-shop folks. Those guys are happy to with
reasonable defaults, and expect Subversion to just stay out the way so
they can get Real Work done.
The big shops, the ones with 100GB working copies, are the people who
are most interested in the disk space savings possible from compressed
pristines, because they are the people who stand to benefit the most.
Those folks have the resources to customize their Subversion
installations, and most likely will. They also likely have people
whose *entire job* is to optimize the system, and we should trust them
to do that job, not coddle them.
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
Received on 2012-04-04 20:04:32 CEST