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

RE: Re: Performance Question

From: Monks, Peter <peter.monks_at_vignette.com>
Date: 2005-01-10 17:36:15 CET

G'day Peter,

Why not use "svn export" instead of "svn checkout"? You won't end up
with a working copy, but unless your build scripts modify the code and
then commit the changes, that shouldn't be an issue.

FWIW that's what I use, and although I haven't tested whether export is
faster or slower than checkout, I'd expect that it's faster (since it
doesn't have to create the ".svn" directories).

Cheers,
Peter
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Monks http://www.sydneyclimbing.com/
pmonks_at_sydneyclimbing.com http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/4455/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 

 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Valdemar Mørch [mailto:nospam@morch.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 8:27am
> To: Subversion Users
> Subject: Re: Performance Question
>
> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> > On Jan 10, 2005, at 8:58 AM, Hari Kodungallur wrote:
> >> Currently, our daily/nightly build (not individual developers) does
> >> fresh checkout everyday. The repository is rather large
> and hence the
> >> concern.
> >
> > That's still inefficient. The build system should run 'svn
> update' on
> > the same working copy every night. That's what most of the
> rest of us do.
>
> I'm with Hari on this one. Daily / official builds should
> start with a
> pristine copy of the module that is about to be compiled,
> ensuring that
> there are no local files and/or modifications.
>
> Yes one could start with a `svn status` to see if there are any local
> files or modifications, but then there is svn:ignore.
> One could then use `svn st --no-ignore`. What other things might bite?
>
> It does bring up an interesting question: If the output of
> `svn st --no-ignore`
> after an
> `svn update`
> is completely empty, is it then guaranteed in all cases that "." will
> equal what one gets with a fresh checkout, so that
>
> `diff -r . ../newcheckout`
>
> is empty?
>
> Are there other things that could be overlooked? E.g. keyword
> expansion
> differences?
>
> What is *the method* of getting a pristine checkout from a possibly
> dirty working copy?
>
> Peter
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 10 17:44:02 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.