Hi JJ,
I used one of the win32 box with collabnet subversion 1.5.0 binary and tested your scenario.
I did not observe any slowness.
Let me try with VS2008 built svn 1.5.0 and see how it fares!
With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran
-----Original Message-----
From: JJ [mailto:eggsgloriouseggs_at_gmail.com]
Sent: Tue 8/12/2008 10:09 PM
To: Kamesh Jayachandran
Cc: users_at_subversion.tigris.org; dev_at_subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: Very slow merge on Windows with SVN 1.5.0
Kamesh,
It's been a while since I followed up on this thread.
Did you get the branch-neon.log file I sent you back in June? If not, you
can get it from http://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2008-06/1088.shtml. Your
email was bouncing every time I tried to resend it.
Have you found anything else related to this? Are there any other plans for
improving Windows merge performance? I also read
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2008-06/0628.shtml, which I assume is
related.
Thanks,
JJ
2008/6/27 J J <eggsgloriouseggs_at_gmail.com>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Did you start the merge at '27/Jun/2008:08:15:31' or '2008/06/27
> 07:54:02'?
>
> According to the linestamp output, I started the command at Fri Jun 27
> 07:52:55 2008. The access log entry at 07:54 was the first entry
> after 07:52 that appeared in the log.
>
> > What is the exact merge command you used for the above?
> >
> > My guess is you do 'svn merge http://host/svn/TESTREPO/branches/RB-25.x
> '.
>
> Yes, that is the command I used.
>
> >
> > I guess RB-25.x has the following ancestry
> > /trunk:2-6
> > /branches/RB-19.4.x:7-9
> > /branches/RB-20.x:10-521
> > /branches/RB-21.x:522-1005
> > /branches/TASK-eES-RB-21.x:1006-1079
> > /branches/RB-21.0.2.x:1080-1086
> > /branches/RB-22.x:1087-1480
> > /branches/RB-23.x:1481-1516
> > /branches/TASK-eES-RB-23.x:1517-1901
> > /branches/RB-24.x:1902-1913
> > /branches/RB-23.1.x:1914-2212
> > /tags/REL-23.1.0.35:2213-2226
> > /branches/RB-23.1.1.x:2227-2378
> > /branches/RB-25.x:2379-2758
> > /ees/branches/RB-25.x:2763-2773
> >
> > Whenever you do the above merge it does some no-op processing for all of
> > the above location segments.
>
> Yes, that is what I gather from the access log and from the neon debug
> log. I've attached a grep of the neon debug log that only shows lines
> that match "ees/branches/". Hopefully that will help some.
>
> > As we are not 'operationally logging the location segments report', we
> > could not see entries in the operational log.
> >
> > But still it does not answer how things are fast in UNIX.
> >
> > With regards
> > Kamesh Jayachandran
> > J J wrote:
> >>> I have rerun the merge and attached svn-action.log and svn-access.log.
> >>
> >> Once more with the attachments.
> >>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >
> > iD8DBQFIZQGg3WHvyO0YTCwRAlL5AKCoxCER92r6pR9IuZgLEquXJFIILQCfbMuh
> > u63bYicWYTpEh3f0KezQl4s=
> > =aqp5
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
>
Received on 2008-08-12 20:49:43 CEST