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

Re: bdb 4.1 really necessary? (was: Re: Caught a hung svn server)

From: Blair Zajac <blair_at_orcaware.com>
Date: 2003-01-14 02:43:05 CET

solo turn wrote:
> why is it necessary to support version 4.1? it seems to be a
> shortterm-version. and the functionality is anyway not needed for
> svn.

4.0 had one db_recover bug where recover process would never complete
that I ran into. There was never a patch submitted to Sleepycay's web
site that resolved this issue, although the fix made it into 4.1.


> why am i asking this?
> i checked the "known bugs" on sleepycat.com. as for what is fixed in
> 4.1, and 4.2, it seems that 4.1 does a few bugfixes from 4.0, and new
> stuff, and 4.2 again does bugfixes for things introduced in 4.1, but
> it has a quite impressive number of bugs fixed (which seem to be in
> 4.1). 4.2 should be out sometime this summer.
> --- Blair Zajac <blair@orcaware.com> wrote:
> > I just discovered that I have a hung svn server (rev 4259).
> >
> > I've attached the server-status page. The server responds to the
> > top level HTML page, but any requests to the repository hang.
> >
> > This is on RedHat 8.0 with db 4.1.25 and apr/apr-util and http2
> > -r APACHE_2_0_BRANCH from 1/4/2003.

Blair Zajac <blair@orcaware.com>
Plots of your system's performance - http://www.orcaware.com/orca/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Jan 14 02:43:04 2003

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.