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

Re: tagging is too heavy, any alternative?

From: David Kramer <david_at_thekramers.net>
Date: 2005-01-14 16:15:47 CET

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Robert Sfeir wrote:

> ROFL... yes I got that after firing off, and Patrick Burleson popped
> up on IM asking me, and realized my retard switch blew a fuse for a few.  
> Sorry for the MAJORLY rookie question.
> In fact it is much much better than CVS, and you can actually turn the
> tag into a branch by making a change in it, and then merging in if
> need me.
> And no, repo did not grow, and process took 0.25 seconds.
> <will go off and wipe eggs off my face>

We just went through this at my company. For about a month before we do
releases, we do daily builds which we need to track. Our project is over
10,000 files, so I thought even the cheap copies would add up after doing
that for a few revs.

We did some automated testing, making hundreds of copies of all 10,000
files, and the overhead was minimal, both in space and checkout time.

What I learned from the wonderful people on this list is that doing the
copy from one complete revision to another url (ex svn cp trunk tags/1.5),
is one single record in the database, it's not even a record for each
file. As files get modified in tags/1.5, new records are created, of
course. And mix-revision copies take more space, but only proportional to
the number of back-revisioned files, not all of the files.

So tag away.

DDDD David Kramer http://thekramers.net
DK KD Pretense and adversity are inversely proportional;
DDDD Adversity reveals the true nature of all things.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 14 16:18:11 2005

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