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

Re: Scalability Testing This Week (was: Re: Repos corruption continued)

From: Mike Mason <mgm_at_thoughtworks.net>
Date: 2003-11-10 17:29:10 CET

C. Michael Pilato wrote:

>>Also, I'm soliciting opinions on how concerned I should be about all the
>>buzz re: repository corruption. I have 3 code bases. One is about 30,000
>>files, one is about 10,000 files, and one is about 2000 files. (These are
>>'C' and C++ sources and headers, makefiles, perl scripts, etc, used to
>>cross compile code for embedded cards in our printers).
>To this, I dunno what to say. Subversion has been hosting its own
>source code for years now, with (thank you, God) not a single case of
>repository corruption. In all the previous scalability testing I've
>performed, I've never been able to corrupt a Subversion repository.
I've got 6 developers working on an 8,000 file repository, merging
changes from another (bigger) team so regularly changing several hundred
files. Never had any corruption problems, never had any performance
problems. I realise this isn't 120 users and 30,000 files, but it
definitely signals to me that Subversion pretty much works. I'd trust it
as much as CVS, and more than VSS or StarTeam, but less than Perforce
(which rocks, but costs money).

The only problem I've had is the Windows client "access denied"
problems, but there's a workaround being put into place for that.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 10 17:30:46 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.