[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn up take a very long time using trunk revision 37502

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:06:07 +0200

I've also noticed the crazy long delay after an "svn up". Good to have
a pointer to the tweak_entries function. An area to examine for
potential optimization.

(and not too surprised by the huge disk writes; it can end up
rewriting the entire wc.db many times over)

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 14:39, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 8:16 AM, Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_at_hyrumwright.org> wrote:
>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 2:29 AM, Marc Haesen wrote:
>>
>>> I am currently using subversion revision 37502 from trunk on windows
>>> (checkout of yesterday).
>>>
>>> I have a working copy of https://docbook.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/docbook/trunk
>>> When I do the ‘svn up’ command on this working copy it takes hours.
>>>
>>> In the debugger I see that it keeps on executing the tweak_entries
>>> routine. In filemon I see that it is continuously writing to the
>>> wc.db files and continuously creating wc.db-journal files. In the
>>> task manager I see that it is writing giga bytes of data to disk.
>>>
>>> Finally the svn up finishes successfully.
>>
>> Subversion trunk now has the new wc-ng storage format for working copy
>> access.  It is known to be slow, and performance will improve
>> significantly as we progress toward 1.7.  That is part of the
>> excitement of running Subversion trunk!
>>
>> Glad to hear that your update finishes successfully, though. :)
>
> Before we just dismiss this as something that gets faster it seems
> like a few questions are in order.  Presumably Marc had to run svn
> cleanup to upgrade the WC to the new format first, right?  So the
> slowness was not in converting the working copy.  How big was this
> update?  Did it pull down a lot of new content?  How long were the
> updates taking with the old WC?
>
> The wc.db should not be writing gigabytes of data to disk.  That would
> be a pretty large WC.  If the update pulled down gigabytes worth of
> new file content, then sure it probably should take hours.  I'd like
> to hear a little more about what Marc was expecting here.
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Mark Phippard
> http://markphip.blogspot.com/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1994804
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1994986
Received on 2009-04-30 15:06:30 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.