[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: BDB vs. FSFS

From: Mark Phippard <MarkP_at_softlanding.com>
Date: 2004-10-18 21:04:26 CEST

"David F. Newman" <dnewman@epnet.com> wrote on 10/18/2004 02:39:57 PM:

> Hi,
> I am curious if the developers of subversion, in general, favor the use
> of one backend over another? Before the release of 1.1 I was under the
> impression that the FSFS back end was being developed solely to satisfy
> those wish to store the repository on a network filesystem. However,
> after reading the comparison at
> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/notes/fsfs I get the distinct
> impression that FSFS is considered overall to be the better choice.

I think their goals are for the file systems to truly be "peers". Neither
one should be considered the favored choice. I think the main thing is
not to think that FSFS is in anyway inferior to BDB. That is definitely
not the case. I suspect it will become the default file system in a
future version as it is less likely to experience problems in the hands of
inexperienced users.

FWIW, I switched all of me repositories to FSFS as soon as the 1.1 RC1
came out. I would highly recommend it to anyone that is considering it.

Mark

_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 18 21:32:16 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.