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

Re: serf and sourceforge.net don't get along (was on users@: Re: 1.7.0-alpha1 feedback)

From: Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 19:27:10 +0200

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:18:24AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > That definitely implies something wrong on the client. If the server
> > is slow, then the client should mostly be blocking.
> >
> > I'll investigate after I finish with this XML parsing thing in
> > ra_serf. (which may fix the observed memory problem)
> As a quick data point: I ran with trunk of both SVN and serf - it
> looks like sf.net turned off keep-alives over SSL - so every request
> needs a new TCP connection. With trunk of serf (which has a bunch of
> SSL and memory fixes), it takes ~15 minutes to do the checkout with no
> memory growth that I could see...but, the constant re-opening of TCP
> connections is pretty painful - but, it should be something that the
> sf.net admins can resolve. -- justin

It's a bit worrying that our new default will require admins to tweak
the server config to provide adequate performance for clients in
the default configuration.

Then again, there's the chicken-and-egg problem. If we don't force
people to push for server-side config changes, they're never gonna

Though maybe we should wait for one more release cycle before making
serf the default, and tell people that to get most out of httpv2
for 1.7 they should make sure their clients use serf and their
server config is adjusted accordingly?

That would provide some time for a soft transition. It might cause
less pain for those who run into the problem with servers they
do not control.
Received on 2011-06-21 19:27:57 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.