On Apr 23, 2008, at 6:05 AM- Apr 23, 2008, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
> Not sure if everybody noticed this. The original questions on the p4
> edit
> speed comparison all used working copies on 'netapp's.. (That is: A
> remote
> directory on a NAS), while we optimize our working copy mostly for
> local
> filesystems..
>
> I don't think any other scanning solutions could fix performance on
> those
> systems (Unless we trigger something that makes the network caching
> fail).
> That network layout almost requires a checkin-checkout solution
> which we
> don't.
> (I'm not sure if we should even spend time to speed up that subversion
> usage)
>
but thats the reality of most corporations, user accounts (and hence
working copies) are on a remote dir, on a NAS. Perforce performs well
in this situation because the "p4 edit" command negates the need for
disk-scanning the wc. I really think we should have this as an
optional mode with SVN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-04-23 18:32:25 CEST