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

Re: serf in 1.8

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:38:59 +0000

Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Philip Martin
> <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>> Another concern is the increased server logging due to the large
>> increase in the number of requests. A 1.8 server does better than older
>> servers, about 50% fewer requests on checkout, but there is still a big
>> increase over neon. No solution other than "it happens".
> You keep mentioning this. But what is the problem? "More logs" is too
> subjective to quality as a concern/problem.
> In October, svn.apache.org generated about 900M of logs(*). Is that a
> problem? I wouldn't think so. At that rate, a simple 1T drive could
> hold over 83 years of logs. Are there installations busier than
> svn.a.o? Sure. Can they afford 1T drives? If they're running at that
> rate, then you bet.

A neon checkout of Subversion adds 6 lines to access.log while a serf
checkout adds 4183 lines, that's 3 orders of magnitude. A server that
previously had space for 1 year of logs may now fill the space in less
than 1 day. Actively maintained sites are probably OK. I'm worried
about less actively maintained servers that need no day-to-day attention
because they "just work", such servers may stop working and require

Maybe it's not a problem, I'm not an expert on server admin.

Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
Received on 2012-11-13 02:39:37 CET

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