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

Re: FSFS vs BDB performance issues

From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2004-08-17 22:19:32 CEST

> 1.05 with BDB (on a cheap IDE based desktop box)
> and
> 1.1-RC2 with FSFS (on a 4proc 10k rpm scsi dell server box)

That's a lot of extra variables there. Sometimes a theoretically
high-end SCSI system can get worse throughput than a supposedly cheapo
IDE system. There could also be slowdowns in 1.1 unrelated to FSFS.

Can you try 1.1-RC2 with BDB on the expensive box and see if you get
similar results?

It's possible that BDB is simply faster for your configuration. Quite
apart from having many files in the revs directory, it's a known and
documented design compromise of FSFS that it isn't as fast at
retrieving recent revs. (But it's a logarithmic curve, so performance
should not continue to degrade much as the repository grows.)

> Possibly this would get sped up when (if) fsfs is converted to split
> revisions based on directories (1000 per dir or so)?


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 17 22:20:19 2004

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.