On Tuesday 22 March 2005 05:40, Dirk Schenkewitz wrote:
> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 2005, at 3:25 PM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> >> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:21:43 +0000, Martin A. Brooks
> >>
> >> <martin@hinterlands.org> wrote:
> >>> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> >>>> I'm getting a bit annoyed that the automatic answer to every BDB
> >>>> problem is "switch to FSFS". :-)
> >>>
> >>> That's easy to fix, just make it so BDB doesn't cause about 80% of
> >>> the problems reported to this list :)
> >>
> >> If you all start using fsfs, that should happen soon enough....
> >
> > Yes, there are problems with the way Subversion utilizes BDB. Yes,
> > we're working to fix the usage, and Sleepycat is working on changing
> > BDB to address some of these things as well.
> >
> > Regardless (as has been said in the past): reading this list gives a
> > skewed view of reality. If I were reading this list, I would think
> > BDB is some horrible, unusable thing. My guess, though, is that 95%
> > of people using BDB repositories have no problems whatsoever. The 5%
> > who have problems tend to dominate the list.
>
> Is there any statistical knowledge or anything better than a guess
> about how many people use BDB and how many use FSF?
Unfortunately, no. :-(
> Since I'm on the list, I have not observed one single complaint against
> FSFS, while lots of problems seem to arise from BDB. That is, as far as
> I observed, the problems where the backend is the culprit divide into
> 100%(BDB):0%(FSFS). Maybe I missed something, please correct me if so.
There have been problems, and they've been corrected quickly. However, a
new one just cropped up this morning (see "File corruption causing
SVNadmin seg fault", msgid
<CB5F6C93-866D-4DE1-8057-AB32537E77E2@gmail.com>).
> I choose FSFS because I didn't want to install and take care of another
> big software packet (and because I heard that BDB was a bit unstable
> when used by other people) - now I'm glad. :-)
>
> It looks like FSFS does a very good job - my congrats for creating it!
Don't get me wrong, FSFS has proven to be stable thus far... but it's also
relatively new. The reason that we may not be seeing as many problems is
because it just isn't used as much, and it's operating fine in whatever
conditions it happens to be in. *shrug* All of this is really just
speculation anyways, unless we find a way to get more solid numbers about
the installed user base.
FWIW, I've been using BDB for years now, and I've had no corruptions, no
dataloss, and I've only had to 'svnadmin recover' a repository once...
and that was due to a problem in the way I set it up.
-John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 22 12:00:47 2005