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

merge branch vs. commit trunk

From: Jan Hendrik <jan.hendrik_at_bigfoot.com>
Date: 2003-09-23 17:39:43 CEST

Hi all out there!

Having to do several global changes on our production website I
was not yet bold enough to do them on a branch. So I did them in
one of the working copies.

However, committing about 4500 pages (80 MB in total) brought
my machine to its knees (Win2K, P200, 144 MB, CPU usage 4-
10%, RAM usage c. 90MB). It would not start committing even
after several hours and I had to stop and part the thing into slices of
less than 1000 pages each. (I would have preferred to have the
set of global changes in one revision though, not in five.)

Now my question:

Would merging a branch back into trunk generally have been both
faster and working with all 4.500 files at once, irrespective of the

I think that it might be so because of the cheap copy character of
the branch. OTOH the changes must be calculated at some point
anyway and I assume that it is that calculation that was too much
here. So a branch may as well not have made any difference ...

Thanks for any shared experience.

Jan Hendrik
Freedom quote:

     The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom.
                -- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

Mailed with Pegasus Mail 3.12c (32bit).
Never heard of it?
Easy to use, full featured - and freely available.
And *no* automatic virus activation and spreading.
Take a look at http://www.pmail.com
Give it a try - and you'll never miss anything else.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Sep 23 17:44:46 2003

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.