On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, [ISO-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:05:05 -0300
> From: "[ISO-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier" <email@example.com>
> To: Martin Tomes <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: "[ISO-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier" <email@example.com>,
> Subject: Re: Support for BDB in RPM's
>>> We are using RHEL 3 with Berkeley DB repositories.
>>> Support for BDB has just been removed from 1.2.x's RHEL 3 RPMs. What do I
>>> do now? I (like surely many others) were depending on the RPM packages.
>>> This mean that I can't upgrade, or that I need to build Subversion (and
>>> face all the Berkeley DB problems) myself. This was done to ease
>>> maintaining the RPMs. What it's really been done is to push the complexity
>>> to us, the users.
>>> Again: What should I do now?
>> Convert to fsfs? I converted to fsfs some time ago without difficulty.
> I don't know... I'm not sold on FSF yet. RHEL3 does not support "dir_index"
> ext2/3 feature. This means directory access is *linear*. And FSFS means
> having thousands of files...
Hmmmm, I've been using FSFS on WBEL3 on a 13.5GB repository on Linux and
not noticed any particular slowdowns, we've got 10687 revisions so far.
In fact, the Linux copy is about 4 - 5 times faster than than the same
thing on Window 2000 server.
But of course this is just one data point, your mileage may vary.
If we can figure out a way to easily shoe-horn in the BDB 4.2.52 to RHEL3
without messing things up then I'm all ears.
If people are willing to live with the problems then I could create
another rhel-3-bdb-4.2.52 build and take it back to like it was or
Let me know what you think the best options are.
David Wayne Summers "Linux: Because reboots are for hardware upgrades!"
david_at_summersoft.fay.ar.us PGP Key: http://summersoft.fay.ar.us/~david/pgp.txt
PGP Key fingerprint = 0B44 B118 85CC F4EC 7021 1ED4 1516 5B78 E320 2001
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Mon Apr 25 18:38:50 2005