I'd like to thank everyone for their input. It sounds like the
universal suggestion is to get off of bdb as soon as possible and
upgrade to fsfs.
Is there anything I need to look out for when migrating from svn/bdb
1.1.2 to svn/fsfs 1.2 (other than following the instructions in the
release notes or whatever)?
On Jul 1, 2005, at 11:01 AM, Karan, Cem (Civ, ARL/CISD) wrote:
> I'm going to second what one of the other people on the list said;
> switch to fsfs ASAP. When I was running BDB based repositories, I
> was getting corruptions at the rate of 1 every 2-3 days (this was
> under an OS X 10.3 system). I switched to FSFS and couldn't be
> happier. No problems, no corruptions, no ANYTHING (except what I
> want and expect).
> I don't know if you're building your own binaries, but if you want
> to and need help, mail me off list.
> Good luck,
> Cem Karan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Camp [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Fri 01-Jul-05 11:17 AM
> To: Subversion Users
> Subject: I lost 7 bdb repositories yesterday!
> This was terrible (but I guess that goes without saying). The server
> "unexpectedly" restarted and when it cam back up, 10 of our 16
> repositories were broken (a variety of errors when a svn co was
> performed). 2-3 were fixable with svnadmin recover. The remainder
> were not fixable with either svnadmin recover or db_recover -c. In
> each case, they reported problems with the "magic number" of one of
> the log files, and list-unused-dblogs always reported that the
> affected files were needed.
> Since we've got 10 engineers waiting to get back to work, the
> immediate solution was to restore the broken repositories from the
> nightly backups. Not pleasant, but at least no work was lost this
> time. One of the repositories is 24 Gigs of source and data for a
> massive project.
> So, after getting my co-workers to switch to subversion, I'm now
> being questioned as to how a catastrophe like this is possible with a
> version control system (we've had other problems in the past too).
> I'm questioning it as well. How can subversion/bdb be this brittle?
> It seems as though you can't rely on it at all if something goes
> wrong! We realize that when a machine goes down, any files that were
> being written at the time are obviously suspect, but we lost
> repositories that have not been used in weeks or months. We have
> checked drive and data corruption on the rest of the server and there
> is none. Only the log.xxx files report issues.
> Our setup:
> Xserve, Mac OS X 10.3, 250 Gig mirrored raid, HFS+ (Journaled)
> svnserve 1.1.2, db-4.2.52
> All access is via ssh. No local access or Apache.
> Clients are a mixture of Linux, Mac, and Windows.
> Questions I was hoping someone could answer:
> - Some of the damaged repositories were not in use at the time
> (idle for days or months). How is that possible without drive or
> filesystem damage? There were no svnserve processes running on those
> files at the time.
> - Is this expected behavior for bdb repositories? This is not the
> first time we've had unrecoverable damage to them (previous times
> seemed to be from normal use).
> - Does fsfs solve the fragility issues that bdb seems to have? If
> moving the repositories to fsfs will make these problems a thing of
> the past, I'm there.
> Management (and my fellow engineers) are going to be wanting some
> answers from me in the next few days. If I can't explain how this can
> be avoided in the future It's a good bet there will be a call to move
> to a more stable platform. I really don't want that, but I'm at a
> point where I don't trust subversion either right now (one of the
> projects I had to restore was mine, and I'm supposed to be Beta
> Can anyone help me figure out what happened and how to prevent this
> from happening again.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Fri Jul 1 21:11:52 2005