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

Re: Performance of file:// vs svn://

From: Ed Hillmann <ed.hillmann_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-04-04 00:54:47 CEST

On 4/4/07, Viktor Linder <viktor@grin.se> wrote:
> Hi!
> My company is currently using svn using the file:// protocol on a
> Windows network share. The reason this was chosen was because of the
> simple authentication setup.
> We are experiencing some performance issues, which has caused me to
> investigate if perhaps we should switch to using svnserve or Apache.
> Has anyone seen any performance gains using svn:// over file://?
> Our usage scenario is changes to many large binary files for 50+ users.
> Thankful for any answer!
> /Viktor Linder

I was doing an investigation for work about moving from CVS to SVN.
Long story short, we have some Perl apps that were using a cvs
repository to make releases of files, and I was looking at the
performance impact of moving to SVN. So, this is Perl on a Unix

As part of this, I compared the same code working against a local
repository (using the file:// url) with a remote repository (using the
svn:// url). Note, that the "remote" repository was on the same
server, just going through the svnserve process. I think (it was some
time ago).

The app used svn list, revprop_get, propget and cat commands, and I
found that the performance was much faster when working against a
local repository.

To give an idea of the difference, when our software cut a major
release (lots and lots of files), using a remote CVS repository took
95 minutes, a remote SVN repository took 25 minnutes, and a local SVN
repository took 10 minutes.

It may pay to give it a try and see if your mileage varies.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Apr 4 00:55:09 2007

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