On 11/01/2011 07:56 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de
> <mailto:stsp_at_elego.de>> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:29:59PM +0000, Philip Martin wrote:
> > I put in the ORDER BY to preserve the parents before children
> > notification used by 1.6. I wonder if that notification order is
> > important?
> See r1196191.
> It should preserve the 1.6.x order (via svn_path_compare_paths()).
> Just a side note. I have not been able to find a "final" version of the
> svnbench tool with results for 1.7.0 compared with 1.6.17. The results I
> can find are only comparing 1.7.x with trunk. Just wondering if those tests
> show a problem with rm so that we can track progress via those tests.
> Adding Neels in case he archived any results.
Have not, but I will gladly kick off a special run for you.
(...some time passes...)
*Disclaimer:* this tests only file://-URL access on a GNU/Linux VM. This is
intended to measure changes in performance of the local working copy layer,
only. These results are *not* generally true for everyone.
It seems to show an improvement on 'svn delete' for 1.7.0.
Received on 2011-11-02 15:39:50 CET