On Sep 17, 2004, at 1:20 AM, Greg Goodrich wrote:
> As far as I'm concerned, bdb, at least with Subversion, is NOT AN
I too noticed that BDB problems seem to account for a lot of the
messages on this list. Just as some say they never have BDB "wedge" I
can say I've never lost data with VSS - but I don't think many people
would say that VSS is a good choice :)
> I then noticed RC2 out there, with the promise of "stable" fsfs with
> 1.1, and decided that I needed to give this a try. I've NEVER had
> this stick (which makes sense, as the "sticking" is a bdb thing I
> think). I've also not had problems with it. I've successfully
> converted our entire repository a couple of times (I'm still not
> really done, trying to make my migration script handle labels from VSS
> as well as multiple VSS projects at one time).
Are you able to share your conversion scripts? (I'm aware of the one
on the links page.)
I'm actually thinking of not converting our VSS database. Instead we
will simply do new development in subversion and only go back to the
VSS database when/if we actually need to get that historical
information. Eventually it will simply be too old to be useful - and
we can just archive it.
> It may be slower (I really don't know, as I couldn't get the bdb
> version to allow me to convert everything over), but at list it
> WORKS. I had all but given up on Subversion until I tried the fsfs (I
> really didn't want to give up on it, as I think it is a very nice
I find it interesting that you mention that subversion may be slow.
Since VSS *IS* very slow, I figured you would notice a speed up.
Though I remember seeing comments about subversion's speed, I also
recall seeing that some speed issues were addressed in the 1.1 stream.
> I strongly encourage you to switch at your earliest convenience.
I would like to, but the others in the office want to do it at a more
convenient time in terms of our product development - and I can't
really ague much with that logic, since we have no evidence that VSS is
causing ay problems right now. The analyze tool that MS recommends
your run weekly - is NEVER run on our VSS database unless we notice
something a bit weird - it has happened maybe twice that we decided to
run it. It always complains about the database, but the errors it
complains about never affect our day to day development. Maybe I
should take back my statement that we have had no loss - we have had no
significant loss. I.e. someone notice that changes they submitted
didn't seem to be there, and they submitted them again and we just
moved on. That's the sort of thing that freaks me out and makes me
want to switch, but because it only happened once or twice and never
caused us any down-time nobody else is in a rush to switch.
Anyway I am making progress and it looks like a switch may be in our
future. So until then I'm tracking subversion's progress, and
particularly the problems I see reported here that might affect us.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Fri Sep 17 16:53:36 2004