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

Re: Tags and scalability (was Re: Enlightenment)

From: Zack Weinberg <zack_at_codesourcery.com>
Date: 2002-09-25 03:43:46 CEST

On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 08:18:19PM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> This discussion has happened many times. I think we have plans to make
> the cached copies optional someday, after we release 1.0. Greg Hudson
> has plans for this... see issue #525. Greg? Details?
> Really, our rationale (two years ago) was that disk space grows FAR
> faster and cheaper than network bandwidth. So when given a choice, we
> chose to optimize for the network. Having cached copies is nice from a
> network standpoint: you can view and revert your changes without the
> network, and the client can send small diffs during commits.

Just to throw in a data point here - I have a repository here which is
under Perforce, with ~2.3GB working copies. Perforce keeps no
metadata whatsoever on the client side. Many operations are
unpleasantly slow, and the major bottleneck is funneling data over the
network. So I think Subversion's tradeoff is probably a good one even
with very large repositories. (I haven't tried Subversion on this
workload, though.)

Have you considered storing the text-base files compressed? It would
be pretty easy to implement - you've already got zlib in there - and
save quite a bit of disk for only a small speed penalty.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 25 03:44:24 2002

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.