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

Re: Performance comparison of svnrdump and svnsync

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 23:42:43 +0300

Could you remind what optimizations those are? Are you suggesting that
they could be pushed down into the svn_ra_replay() implementations?



Ivan Zhakov wrote on Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:28:31 +0400:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 21:20, Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > I thought I recalled when svnrdump was first created that there were some
> > timing comparisons made with svnsync that showed it to be faster at doing a
> > full dump/sync of a remote repository.  When I test via HTTP:
> > svnrdump dump http://server/repos | svnadmin load repos
> > And compare this to an equivalent svnsync, I find that the times it takes to
> > do this is essentially the same.  I then compared the HTTP access logs of
> > the server and see that the two commands produce identical logs, so
> > obviously there are not going to be big performance differences.
> > Am I missing something?  I realize that svnrdump still fulfills a need, so I
> > am not questioning the value of the tool.  Just questioning whether my
> > results make sense.  As I see it, for this specific scenario, someone would
> > be better off to still simply use svnsync for this purpose.
> I made some performance optimizations in svnsync. Probably these
> optimization also makes sense for svnrdump. Maybe this explains the
> difference.
> --
> Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2011-08-17 22:43:24 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.