cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
>
> cmpilato@collab.net writes:
>
> > =?UTF-8?B?QnJhbmtvIMSMaWJlag==?= <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> >
> > > >In one week, let's upgrade to Berkeley 4.1.25, what say?
> > > >
> > >
> > > -1
> > >
> > > Just upgrading BDB, after the fiasco that caused last time, is not a
> > > good idea.
> >
> > Yes yes yes. I've been using 4.1.25 on my laptop for a few weeks now,
> > with an outstanding TODO of banging it with stress.pl. While we
> > *think* the problems we had with svn.collab.net weren't related to
> > BDB, it costs too much to be wrong about such things.
>
> Yuck. I just ran 4 instances of stress.pl. At about revision 125,
> two of them pooped out with conflicted commits. I started two more to
> replace them and went back to what I was working on. Now, at revision
> 361, I have two more failed instances (conflicts again), but also two
> that are hung.
>
> This significantly reduces the chances of my smiling for the next few
> moments.
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> Okay. I'm over it now.
>
> But there is at least something to be examined here.
Yes, I think having one of the core svn developers look at this would
make myself and other BDB 4.1.25 users very happy :)
Best,
Blair
--
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 Mon May 19 22:28:51 2003