Blair Zajac wrote:
>cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
>
>
>>Blair Zajac <blair@orcaware.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Actually, a really simple script that wrapped `svnlook log old-repos' and
>>>>`svnadmin setlog new-repos' could do the trick, I imagine. Both
>>>>operations are pretty darn fast.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>True, but on the current svn repository, that would mean forking at
>>>least 3000 processes, which is too many.
>>>
>>>
>>Nonono. I mean, don't sweat the log stuff during your incremental
>>dumps. Just, at the time you go to *load* your dumps, keep your old
>>repos around so you can fly over it, reading the logs, and updating
>>them on the newly-loaded repos. Obviously, this is no good if your
>>reason for re-loading your repos is because your old one got blown to
>>a cloud of pink mist by a photon torpedo.
>>
>>
>
>I do need to sweat the log stuff doing the incremental backups.
>
>I plan on replacing the db backup solution with the svnadmin dump based
>backup solution due to the large disk space that the db based backups
>are using, I indicated my the first message in this thread.
>
>So this needs to be a real backup solution. Having a dump solution that
>has old log messages in it is not an acceptable solution.
>
Why not just add an option to tweak-log.cgi to have it re-dump a
revision when it changes its log message? I think that's the simplest
possible solution, has no extra overhead, and does exactly what you want.
--
Brane Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 22 18:08:31 2002