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

Re: Subversion/Eclipse Performance on Windows

From: Andy Levy <andy.levy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 23:07:57 -0500

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 23:00, David Weintraub <qazwart_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> It's mainly using Subversion for updating and checking out where they
> notice it slower. I know that Subversion has a lot more data that's
> brought over the network, and Windows is not good at transferring data
> over the network, but it should be faster than CVS in updating,
> diffing, revering, and other activities because it doesn't have to
> connect to the server to fetch a lot of data.
>
> We are using http:// w/ LDAP authorization, and FSFS. One programmer
> is saying that FSFS is what makes it so slow.
>
> Anyway, I was just curious whether or not this seemed to be an issue
> with anyone. Or whether Subclipse or Subversive was a better plugin
> for Eclipse.

Is it the network access & server that's slow, or is it local
performance? Remember that Subversion pulls everything down into a
temp directory in the .svn directory, then copies it to the "real"
location. So disk I/O can be a killer. Especially if you're running an
on-access virus scanner.

An anecdotal data point: after I upgraded my repositories to 1.5 (and
our clients as well; we're running Windows all around, so this is
TortoiseSVN), a co-worker told me that his SVN operations were
noticeably faster than before. I, OTOH, noticed little to no
improvement (same repositories), and in some cases maybe even a
performance degradation. His system is significantly better in I/O
performance than mine, in part due to a faster hard drive and in part
because my system desperately needs to be reimaged.

I've also noticed that Java disk I/O seems to be much slower on
Windows than other OSes.

> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Andy Levy <andy.levy_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 14:26, David Weintraub <qazwart_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Here's what we have:
>>>
>>> * Subversion is running on a Linux box under a fairly recent version
>>> of Redhat. This is not exactly a high performance box, but I don't
>>> think this is an issue. They use Subclipse as the plugin to allow
>>> Eclipse to talk to Subversion.
>>> * Our Subversion server is running release 1.5. However, it is still
>>> using Format 2 instead of Format 3 because of issues with viewvc.
>>> * Developers use Eclipse running on a Windows XP box. These boxes are
>>> Pentium Dual Core running around 2.8Ghz and have betwen 1Gb and 2Gb of
>>> memory. Diskspace is about 100Gb.
>>> * Our application runs under JBoss. It isn't a .NET application (which
>>> I know can cause performance issues). However, it really is a sort of
>>> sprawling application. There are lots of JAR files that have to be
>>> checked out (Most are probably not even needed, but that's another
>>> story altogether). However, once you do a checkout, the JAR files
>>> don't change.
>>>
>>> A couple of developers are complaining about very poor performance.
>>> They claim that Subversion is much slower than CVS (which we just
>>> converted over from).
>>>
>>> I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions for improving
>>> performance. Would putting the .svn folders as exemptions in our
>>> .project file help? Would using a particular version of Eclipse or a
>>> particular version of Subclipse? What about Subversive?
>>
>> I think more detail is needed. Is the perception that Subversion is
>> slowing down the application when running under JBoss? Or that
>> operations in Eclipse are slow? Or are all Subversion operations
>> consistently slower than their CVS counterparts?
>>
>> What's the definition of "much slower"? What would adding the .svn
>> folders as exceptions in .project accomplish (IOW, what will it do
>> that isn't being done now, and how do you think that would impact
>> performance)?
>>
>> I don't think a specific version will change things either way, other
>> than the notion that newer versions are generally all-around better
>> than older versions.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> David Weintraub
> qazwart_at_gmail.com
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=981988

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2008-12-10 05:10:00 CET

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