On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 09:07, Adam Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 11:33, Craig Robson wrote:
> > Many people have seen the problems with db4.1. I ran many tests and with
> > db4.1 and the problems were quite repeatable. Lockups, wedged repository,
> > etc.
> >
> > One test that we used was to create a new repository and grab the gcc source
> > code and try to check it in and out a few times. It always failed on db4.1
> > for me.
>
> Thanks for the input. I assume you are not running Fedora Core 1(let me
> know if you already tested that). I plan to run the same tests on
> Fedora Core 1... I suspect that RedHat backported fixes that were made
> in 4.2 of db into Fedora's Core 1's db 4.1 that caused most of the
> problems in subversion. RedHat tends to do that a lot. What I am
> hoping is that the default 4.1 is bad to use, but RedHat's(Fedora Core 1
> specifically) version is ok to use. So far(since .32 I haven't had any
> issues).
>
> If you can think of any other scenarios to test to try and find any
> issues with using Fedora's Core 1's db 4.1, let me know.
>
> I realize that subversion developers are safe just saying don't use db
> 4.1 without exception. I don't really expect an official "It's ok to
> use Fedora Core 1's db 4.1", but if I find some scenarios to test that
> does not work on most db 4.1 installations, but work fine on Fedora Core
> 1's db 4.1 I will end up just using the same 4.1 with FC1 that I have
> been using.
>
I ran my tests on both Fedora Core 1 and Redhat Enterprise 3. Both
failed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Mar 22 18:42:24 2004