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

Re: Not able to compile against Berkeley 4.3

From: Ryan Schmidt <subversion-2005_at_ryandesign.com>
Date: 2005-11-27 21:09:06 CET

On Nov 27, 2005, at 19:45, Stefan Langer wrote:

> Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> Is there a reason why you particularly want Berkeley DB? I would
>> recommend compiling Subversion without BDB support and using FSFS
>> repositories instead. FSFS repositories are the default since
>> Subversion 1.2.0. If you have existing BDB repositories, you can
>> dump them before installing the new Subversion, then load the
>> dumps into new FSFS repositories after you've upgraded.
> Is there any drawback or advantage to using FSFS?

There are numerous advantages of FSFS.

- You can move FSFS repositories to other platforms and other
operating systems without having to do a dump/load cycle.
- You won't have to dump/load when you upgrade to a newer major
versions of Berkeley DB.
- You don't have to have Berkeley DB installed at all.
- You can back up a repository simply by copying the directory. (With
BDB you need to first use the hotcopy script to make a copy of the
repository, then back that up; this can be time- and disk-space
- FSFS repositories cannot get wedged (some might say "corrupted")
like BDB repositories can.
- Once a revision in an FSFS repository is created, its data will
never get modified. This makes for efficient backups. (BDB
repositories' old revision data changes when new revisions are added.)
- You don't need write access to an FSFS repository to read from it.
(You do for BDB.)

I'm not aware of any disadvantages to using FSFS.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Nov 27 21:10:55 2005

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.