Re: Very slow browsing from SVN 1.1[Scanned]

"JS.staff" <jsparrow@ecclescollege.ac.uk> writes:
> That's a pitty - I'm really impressed with the speed of 1.1 and
> fsfs. Much more snappy than 1.0.6 and bdb (don't know which is the
> causal factor).
>
> I guess other improvements in the win32-win32 comms have cancelled
> out any speed reductions inherent in fsfs? (isn't is supposed to be
> slightly slower?)

Actually, I don't think so, at least not in general.

> Bad PR? Yup! My group of testers just rejected SVN as a SCM
> replacement candidate because of two major reasons: lack of file
> locking, and poor performance.

If you have time, it would help us to know which specific operations
they found too slow, and how big the data sets were.

Thanks,
-Karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 4 19:47:43 2004