Both transferred more-or-less the same amount of data. I tried to keep
both workspaces in parallel for the experiments and did 2 commits after
an initial import. There were some differences though, however they were
small, the numbers of new and modified files for both systems were in my
previous message. But in both svn commits (first time I forgot to add
few new files) the waiting time was huge, I did not measure it for the
first time but it was of the same order of magnitude.
One thing about the file set was that most of the files were binary:
libraries, executables and png files.
>> Sergey Bogdanov
intel massachusetts
M/S HD2-246
77 Reed Road,
Hudson, MA 01749
Tel: (978)553-2724
>-----Original Message-----
>From: kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net [mailto:kfogel@newton.ch.collab.net]
On
>Behalf Of kfogel@collab.net
>Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 2:17 PM
>To: Bogdanov, Serge
>Cc: users@subversion.tigris.org
>Subject: Re: svn commit/checkout performance issues (P5)
>
>Sergey Bogdanov <Serge.Bogdanov@intel.com> writes:
>> add, commit, tag
>> ================
>>
>> svn add --force 3:25
>> svn commit 44:52 (unacceptible) (the initial
analysis
>> took around 5 min, the rest was spent in
>> data transfer)
>> svn copy 0:01
>>
>> accurev add -x 0:30
>> accurev keep -m 1:21
>> accurev promote -p 1:55 accurev mksnap
0:01
>
>This one's a bit surprising.
>
>Can you tell us more about the data involved here? What were you
>adding? Did svn and accurev really transfer the same amount of data?
>
>Thanks,
>-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 29 21:21:26 2004