----- Original Message -----
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Florian Ludwig
> > <vierzigundzwei_at_gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> this topic was raised several times in the past - the answers
> >> range from
> >> "will be better/solved in the next version 1.7" or "it is due to
> >> ntfs vs
> >> ext3/4" or it's the AV, network setup or the Windows file indexing
> >> service.
> >> After disabling all those and running a test checkout on Linux and
> >> Windows
> >> on the same machine I still get a result of Linux being 7.3x times
> >> faster.
> >> Any ideas why?
> >
> >
> > There are probably some good discussions about this in the archives
> > during
> > the run-up to 1.7 but my memories are fading. I do not think
> > anyone ever
> > said that the difference would be "solved" but more that the
> > architectural
> > changes in 1.7 were going to close the performance gap on Windows
> > when
> > compared to SVN 1.5/1.6 on Linux. There were a couple of big
> > performance
> > fixes backported to some the later 1.6.x releases so the "win" in
> > 1.7 is not
> > as great when compared with 1.6.latest as it is with 1.6.0.
>
> I remember this. The deadly operation was the initial checkout on
> network based file systems, especially CIFS on the Windows boxes. The
> few servers that ran NFS acted much more like Linux hosts, or like
> Linux hosts usin gNFS. A number of changes in Subversion, over time,
> reduced the perfidious chattiness that hampered CIFS baed checkouts,
> and all Windows users with network mounted working copies became
> *much* happier.
>
> Let's do be careful to draw distinctions between local file systems,
> like NTFS and ext4, and network file systems like CIFS and NFS. I'm
> afraid it's common to handwave those away as not making a difference,
> and they really do.
Maybe windows users are happier (they are not), but Linux users are just scratching their heads over svn performance.
svn, version 1.7.8 (r1419691), standard redhat vm.
NFS:
A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/scratch-pad.txt
A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/use-cases-resolution.txt
A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/design-overview.txt
A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/detection.txt
^Csvn: E200015: Caught signal
real 0m26.980s
user 0m0.454s
sys 0m1.281s
[11:02:30 user_at_host:~/svn_tests ] $ du -sh benchmark-svn
12M benchmark-svn
Local:
A /tmp/benchmark-svn/branches/1.6.x/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/bdb/reps-table.c
A /tmp/benchmark-svn/branches/1.6.x/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/bdb/bdb_compat.h
^Csvn: E200015: Caught signal
real 0m13.241s
user 0m3.939s
sys 0m4.731s
[11:02:30 user_at_host:~/svn_tests ] $ du -sh /tmp/benchmark-svn
144M /tmp/benchmark-svn
What we've got here, 20x or something?
--Roman
Received on 2014-04-25 17:10:55 CEST