Re: Optional text base design discussion?
Brandon Ehle wrote:
> Has there ever been a design discussion on how to implement optional
> text base working copies?
> I have found plenty of flame wars in the past on the subject, but I
> haven't found any design discussions on the best way to implement this.
> The possibilities I have seen so far:
> Compressed text bases
> * Keeps current low bandwidth performance
> * Reduces the amount of disk space slightly
> * Local working copy operations are slower
> Removal of the text bases
> * Low bandwidth performance suffers
> * Reduces the amount of disk space by half in some cases
> * Local working copy operations possibly require server communication
> * Faster performance for working copy operations that have lots of files
> * Checkout performance for large binary files (no EOL translation) has
> the possibility of doubling
> * Less chance for search and replace bugs
> Single .svn directory (database?) for the entire working copy
> * Could be combined with compressed or missing text bases
> * Faster performance for working copies with lots of directories
You did not mention changing the .svn directory into a special database
and not having so many individual files within it. Still have one
per directory but have minimal contents. This could dramatically
improve some WC operations without losing the tear-off and low-bandwidth
BTW - I find the WC performance to not be that bad relative to the benefit
of the "svn diff" and "svn status" performance win due to the text base.
Now, I do not use Windows much so I do not suffer from the filesystem
performance issues that come up there.
Michael Sinz Technology and Engineering Director/Consultant
"Starting Startups" mailto:email@example.com
My place on the web http://www.sinz.org/Michael.Sinz
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Sat Oct 14 23:34:41 2006
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev