I've been using SVN for quite a while now (over 2
years), and have loved it. Since I first started using
SVN before FSFS was available, everything has been
stored in BDB. A few months ago, I was trying to
upgrade my server from 1.3.0 to 1.4.0 - I really
really want to get the replication functionality - but
was having difficulties somewhere in the build process
(yes, I manage the server from source; I believe the
issue was with getting BDB to upgrade or something,
not with SVN). I got distracted, so I don't remember
the details right now, but I remember I did have a
question per the backend - since that was where my
issue was.
In past, I installed OpenSSL, Apache2, Neon, BDB, and
then SVN. The repository data was stored in the BDB
formats, and I use the 'svnadmin dump' to perform my
backups. I had just set up a new set of repositories -
about 5 or so - using the BDB format; so I was trying
to contemplate whether to switch to FSFS over BDB. (I
am aware of the trade-offs per the FAQ & docs.)
What would people recommend?
Is it worth it to keep working through getting BDB to
compile & SVN to link it? Or is it far easier & better
to convert over to FSFS and drop BDB support?
Part of my consideration for converting over was the
transition of the docs recommending FSFS over BDB.
In case it matters...
I keep several projects in any given repository.
Historically, all developers worked directly out of
the trunk for each project, with branches for
releases. I am considering now, moving towards the
'trunk is sacred' philosophy. I also have Trac
projects setup & integrated a bit with SVN.
Any advice is highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Benjamen R. Meyer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Feb 27 23:33:29 2007