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

Re: Subversion trunk (r1078338) HTTP(/WC?) performance problems?

From: Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:34:31 +0300

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 01:23, John Beranek <john_at_redux.org.uk> wrote:
> On 09/03/2011 20:17, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 22:07, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 12:34, Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> It seems I found reason why ra_serf is slower than ra_neon. ra_serf
>>>> sends CHECKOUT request for _each_ folder and file that being imported,
>>>> while ra_neon perform it only for root directory. Maybe DAV experts
>>>> can answer which behavior is correct: should WebDAV client CHECKOUT
>>>> each resource being modified or it's fine to CHECKOUT only the root of
>>>> commit operation?
>>> There is no other WebDAV server to talk to, besides our own. That is
>>> one of the primary rationales behind the HTTPv2 effort: recognizing
>>> reality, rather than living in an theoretical world.
>>> Thus, if Neon's approach works with our server, then ra_serf can go
>>> ahead and use that approach, too.
>> Hi Greg,
>> My investigations was wrong: actually ra_neon doesn't send CHECKOUT
>> request only for sub-directories and file of directories being added
>> in the same commit. We still have to CHECKOUT directories when using
>> HTTPv1 to provide baseline.
>> Anyway I've implemented ra_neon's approach in r1079967.
>> John,
>> Could you please provide timings of 'svn import' with updated
>> Subversion trunk and Serf trunk?
> Apparently fixed!
> To a remote 1.6.15 server:
> ra_serf: 18 seconds
> ra_neon: 16 seconds
I see that ra_serf still little bit slower than ra_neon.

Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2011-03-10 07:35:26 CET

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.