On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 08:18:19PM -0500, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> >My other concern is with the "hidden cached copies of
> >every file" scheme. For something the size of Apache,
> 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.
When you are going to do this, please, please think about sites that
still work on big (like '95 kind of big) servers with 7-15 developers
sharing a UNIX machine, each developer working on 2-3 branches of the
tree, with 2-3 sandboxes/workspaces for each branch. Some kind of
super-smart cache sharing is required.
Thinking about it, a solution would be a distributed setup with one
repository on each devel machine, and everybody accessing the repository
through ra_local and no cache in .svn dirs.
"If it's not broken, let's fix it till it is."
41A9 2BDE 8E11 F1C5 87A6 03EE 34B3 E075 3B90 DFE4
Received on Wed Sep 25 07:16:17 2002
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored