Our environment is essentially Linux boxes running RH 7.3 with NFS v2
and a NetApp. I am not at all confident of using Linux as the server
due to a warning regarding BerkeleyDB/Linux/NFS I found on
sleepycat.com. Perforce has a similar warning on their website
regarding their server but does claim that Solaris 2.5.1 and later do
work. We do have a SPARC Ultra10 that is available to run svnserve so
this might be an option. The theory then is to also allow svnadmin only
on the machine with the server as well.
However, this is starting to feel kind of spooky. It might be a good
idea to cover this in a bit more depth in the SVN book as
high-availability network attached storage is quite common. I mean, how
can I justify NOT putting the repository on the NetApp when it has hot
spare drives, redundant network ports and the like.
So, any comments regarding Solaris etc?
On Tue, 2004-02-10 at 14:54, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-02-10 at 16:33, Chris Wein wrote:
> > I am evaluating subversion for a new project and immediately ran into
> > the problem where the repository cannot be NFS mounted due to locking
> > requirements.
> Well, the NetApp folks claim to support posix locking semantics
> "perfectly" over NFS. That gets you halfway to using BerkeleyDB over
> NFS, but there's still the problem of using mmap() on file regions. If
> more than one machine tries to access the repository at once, you'll
> probably run into serious database corruption problems. If only *one*
> computer ever accesses the repository over NFS, then it will probably
> work just fine.
> (This isn't a terrible restriction, of course. Just use a Subversion
> server process (apache or svnserve) to access the repository over NFS,
> making it available to clients.)
> Let us know how it works for you.
E-Mail : firstname.lastname@example.org
Phone : 408-869-4035
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Wed Feb 11 23:40:04 2004