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

Re: Subversion branch deltification policy is more space-hungry than CVS

From: Max Bowsher <maxb_at_ukf.net>
Date: 2004-05-26 23:03:30 CEST

Mark Benedetto King wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 10:34:26AM -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>> "Max Bowsher" <maxb@ukf.net> writes:
>>>>> This becomes very visible when people convert from CVS to subversion,
>>>>> and their repositories increase significantly in size.
>>>> Are you sure that this is the reason people's repositories are
>>>> increasing in overall size?
>>> I am sure that it is a major contributing factor. There may be other
>>> with the same symptom, but this is a real problem.
>> Hmmm. I guess I'm surprised. We see repository size increases
>> (compared to CVS) even in repositories that don't have a lot of active
>> development on branches, or so I thought. I guess I'd want to do some
>> careful measuring -- or maybe you have already? What were the stats?
> IIUC, even if the branches aren't actively developed, once you've made
> changes on a branch those fulltexts live forever, even if you
> delete the branch (except on libsvn_fs_fs).

Karl: Yes, I've seen one report of unexpectedly large size even with
cvs2svn --trunk-only.
However, all other factors aside, svn stores multiple fulltexts for a file
when it is copied and then modified, whereas cvs stores only one fulltext.

Mark: Correct. Deleting the branch does not reclaim the fulltexts. (at least
for BDB)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 26 23:13:35 2004

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.