I haven't seen any results suggesting that sharding will have much of an
impact on svn performance proper.
Usually these bad performance results suggest some kind of complexity
explosion in the back-end code, of the general form "we're opening all
of the rev files between 1 and N for each step of the history trace."
No way to figure out what's actually wrong without going in with a
debugger.
On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:41 -0400, John Peacock wrote:
> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > What in the world has happened to FSFS in 1.5?!
>
> Did you reshard the local FSFS repo? If not, perhaps you should try and
> see how that affects the timing...
>
> John
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 30 21:50:32 2007