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

Re: Subversion 1.9.0-dev FSFS performance tests

From: Neels Hofmeyr <neels_at_elego.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 23:16:48 +0200

On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 05:23:14PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 07.07.2014 17:07, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > On 07/07/2014 10:58 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> >> My technical opinion that FSFS7/log addressing is slower by design,
> >> because it's doing more (read index, then read data instead of just
> >> read data) and only caching makes them comparable on performance to
> >> FSFS6 repositories.
> > I'm coming into this kinda late and after two weeks of vacation, so
> > please forgive me if I misunderstand the above, but is it true that
> > FSFS7 requires some kind of non-trivial caching just to match FSFS6's
> > performance?
> Yup.

<from the off>
Sounds bad, but then again I remember that wc-ng's projected performance
boost over 1.6 has not been evident from the start, either.
"It's what you make of it" ??


Received on 2014-07-15 23:17:34 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.