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

Re: High Availability Recommendation

From: Justin Johnson <justinjohnson_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-01-29 23:06:27 CET

> > I am using FSFS. I was planning on having the filesystem mounted on
> > two systems at the same time, but only so we can quickly fail over if
> > one goes down. Won't the repository be corrupted if two servers are
> > actively writing to the same repository at the same time? If not, I
> > am confused as to how.
> >
> It's been explained to me that the with FSFS format, the file locking with the Subversion binaries the transaction files in the FSFS directories keep things in check. But this means putting a set of Subversion binaries on each server and not the NFS mount. However, the binaries don't require much configuration. As you said, hooks scripts and other stuff involving the repositories themselves is where all the configuration occurs.

Wow, that would be great! Can someone else confirm this for me and
explain how it works or point me to something I can read about it?
Why would this work only if the binaries aren't on the NFS mount? I
can see the need for different configuration files in Apache due to
different host names for the servers. Is there some other reason the
binaries would need to be off of the NFS mount?

I will also look further into svnsync to see if that is a better
option for me than rsync.

Thanks for your advice!

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jan 29 23:06:54 2007

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.