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

Re: CVSNT and Subversion binary file handling comparison

From: Simon Butler <simon_at_icmethods.com>
Date: 2006-03-17 23:52:02 CET

hi, did you compare times for checkout/update/commit etc ?

rgds.

On Mar 17, 2006, at 2:36 PM, Alfredo Anderson wrote:

> Hi, we are evaluating CVSNT and Subversion.
> Comparing binary files handling, we've found that CVSNT seems to be
> much more efficient than Subversion.
>
> We tested with the file mysql-noinstall-5.0.18-win32.zip
> (38.401.269 bytes) , downloaded from www.mysql.com
>
> The next table shows the file system space used by subversion and
> CVSNT after operations 1, 2, 3 y 4.
>
> 1 2
> 3 4
> SVN: 37.932.031 37.983.254 46.071.560
> 72.523.597
> CVS: 38.535.677 38.587.299 38.779.655
> 38.990.102
>
> 1: zip file added to the repository
> 2: access.cfg file was eliminated from the .zip and the change was
> commited
> 3: mysqlclient.lib file was eliminated from the .zip and the
> change was commited
> 4: mysqld-debug.exe file was eliminated from the .zip and the
> change was commited
>
> On our first test we used a zip file with compressed images and we
> got similar results. Then we used the mysql installer to work on a
> public accesible file (in case that someone was interested in
> checking our results).
>
> Somebody can confirm that the performance difference in handling
> binary files between CVSNT and Subversion is indeed like the one
> that our tests show up ?
>
> There is a way to improve the binary files handling of Subversion ?
>
> Regards
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org For
> additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Mar 17 23:53:04 2006

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