Re: Poor performance in windows. Switching back to CVS

> On 2/7/07, Joaquim Oliveira <joaquim.oliveira@atlantico.com.br> wrote:
> > SVN access was made using svn:// protocol. CVS was faster in all
> > situations. Most of then, it is twice faster. For example, an update in
> > working copy root folder was about 20% faster in CVS.
> > We noticed that SVN creates more administrative files and directories
> > than CVS. The checkout size is:
> > - CVS: 24849 files, 4841 folders. Disk usage: 164 MB
> > - SVN: 27450 files, 22319 folders (!). Disk usage: 261 MB

That's the price you pay (in disk size at least) for being able to
make diffs of the working copy against the last version, without
needing access to the server.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Feb 7 13:07:25 2007