On 08/03/11 09:34, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:21, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 08/03/11 05:34, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:26 PM, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> Hmm...I'm surprised (and disappointed). No one is interested in
>>>> Subversion 1.7 being lower performance than 1.6?
>>> You're not telling us something we don't already know (go read the
>>> archives some time). Many folks are still working on improving the
>>> performance of 1.7...so, general complaints aren't going to be
>>> terribly productive.
>> I think "general complaints" is a bit unfair on me.
>> I posted specific timings using the current trunk code, in case it was
>> news to anyone.
>> I guess from now on I'll just keep my investigations to myself.
> Hi John,
> I'm really interested of performance tests especially of ra_serf.
> Performance degradation of svn import over ra_serf looks very strange.
> Could you please provide more details about your configuration?
OK, I've been a bit more rigorous on my latest ra_serf import tests. So,
on a Fedora 14 x86_64 machine (gcc 4.5.1, APR 1.3.9) I built 1.6.16 with
serf 0.7.1, and trunk(r1078338) with serf 0.7.1.
I imported the same dataset over HTTP to another server on the LAN. This
server runs Apache 2.2.3 with mod_dav_svn 1.6.15, it is a CentOS 5.5
So, the timings:
Now, that is looking like a serious problem, rather different to my
previous comparison, which compared a remote ra_neon access to a local
So, as a comparison, I ran the same tests to a localhost trunk(r1078338)
server. Fedora 14 x86_64, Apache 2.2.17.
John Beranek To generalise is to be an idiot.
http://redux.org.uk/ -- William Blake
Received on 2011-03-08 15:01:48 CET