Re: Which Berkeley version to use? NOT 4.1.x!!!

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:

>John Peacock <jpeacock@rowman.com> writes:
>
>
>
>>Either 4.1.x is much more paranoid about checkpoints or there is
>>something wrong with the way svn is interacting with BDB, I think.
>>I'll have to defer to someone who actually knows the code to fix it.
>>
>>
>
>I think most of the developers here are certain that libsvn_fs needs
>to be doing a whole lot less BDB checkpointing, and create many fewer
>BDB transactions. BDB 4.1 seems to be more "sensitive" to our
>mis-usage of this features. :-)
>
>
Yeah... I've been looking at that on and off for several months, and the
conclusion I always come up with is that the trail mechanism is totally
bogus, and that our FS implementation layer separation (tree vs. dag vs.
BDB backend) leaves much to be desired. I'm sort of hoping that GAT's FS
refactoring effort will make it easier to get this fixed.

What we really have to do is use BDB's implicit locking for read-only
operations, and small, short transactions for writes. There are probably
even some operations that don't require transactions even for writes.

-- 
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