Re: Repository access woes

Paul Smith wrote:

> This used to be an issue, but many databases these days are certified to
> work with modern NAS solutions (NetApp and EMC stuff for example). I
> thought even Oracle allowed this, although I'm not sure about that.

You are correct it seems:

        http://otn.oracle.com/deploy/availability/htdocs/vendors_nfs.html

However, Sleepycat does not, in general, support remote file systems:

        http://www.sleepycat.com/docs/ref/env/remote.html

And the larger point, lest that be lost here, is that Subversion's first target
should be the widest possible environment, not just those few [expensive] NAS
platforms which break the rule.

Hence, until 1.0 is out and other database backends are brought into the fold,
there is basically no point in complaining that Subversion won't run on NFS
partitions. It just doesn't; it is a limitation of BDB that cannot be easily
worked around. If that means that certain enterprises with rules about such
data having to reside on specific filesystems cannot adopt Subversion, that is
the unfortunate reality.

John

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Suite H
Lanham, MD  20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5748
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org