Re: svn commit: rev 5194 - trunk/subversion/libsvn_fs

Karl Fogel wrote:

>brane@tigris.org writes:
>
>
>>Log:
>>We decided some time ago to kill off this txn_checkpoint.
>>
>>* subversion/libsvn_fs/fs.c (cleanup_fs): Don't call txn_checkpoint.
>>
>>
>
>I had a local diff with this change, and have been testing it using
>stress.pl.
>
stress.pl isn't really the right kind of test for this. You need a huge
repository to see the difference (or the timeouts).

>I didn't really see much improvement (though I'm not
>totally convinced that my testing methodology was perfect). I did get
>some deadlocks with the change, that I didn't seem to get without it.
>
Deadlocks? I can't see how removing a txn_checkpoint could cause
deadlocks. Are you sure it wasn't something else?

>I'm not objecting to the change -- I mean, it makes sense -- so much
>as asking if you tested. Did it make a difference for you, and if so,
>what sort?
>
>
I can't recall the thread now, but I do remember people reporting that
removing this checkpoint (or adding parameters to make "take" less
often) would avoid client timeouts during long operations on large
repositories.

Now I wonder. Your report of deadlocks worries me a bit. Perhaps those
people who reported problems could try again with the current code?

-- 
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