Hi Stefan,
I did some experiment on the factors that effect svn performance. Here is
the data:
on linux, I mounted a fat32 disk and checked out a repository, the time
cost by fat32 has no difference with ext3 or ext2.
And I did another test on windows. The result is quite interesting.
I uses TSVN to checkout the same repository on fat32 and ntfs. Both of
them ended in the same time.
And I uses svn in cygwin and svn in linux running on a virtual machine to
checkout the same repository. They have difference:
svn in cygwin is much more slower than svn in virtual machine. It ended at
the same time of TSVN. And svn in virtual machine is a little bit slower
that svn in linux but much more faster than svn in cygwin.
So I guess that filesystem has little effect on the preformance. The
bottleneck is windows itself not the filesystem.
And what I'm wondering is on which part or component windows slows down
the speed of SVN ?
Thanks!
Best regards!
Sincerely,
Alex Zhu
Quality Engineering Department III
Sunnorth Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.
Tel: +86-10-62981668 Ext. 2792 (Office) / 2056 (3G Lab)
Fax: +86-10-62985972
Email: bohao@sunnorth.com.cn
"Stefan K¨¹ng" <tortoisesvn@gmail.com> дÓÚ 2007-11-20 16:06:22:
> On Nov 20, 2007 8:45 AM, Ö첪ºÀ <bohao@sunnorth.com.cn> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > :) I understand. Thus I have words to answer those questions. But
could give
> > me some detail that why they have such differences? I mean from the
buttom
> > view point eg. file system, data structure etc.
>
> CVS and Subversion are not the same.
>
> The svn performance when checking out a working copy is affected by
> NTFS and the fact that svn keeps a pristine copy of every file in the
> working copy. Have a look inside the '.svn' folders in every working
> copy and you will see what I mean.
>
> Stefan
>
> --
> ___
> oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
> (_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
> \ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
> /_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
Received on Mon Nov 26 04:37:51 2007