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

Re: Very slow merge on Windows with SVN 1.5.0

From: Kamesh Jayachandran <kamesh_at_collab.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:59:22 +0530

Hash: SHA1

I tried to create similar situation in my dev environment.

Create branch m0 from /trunk.
Renamed m0 to m1 committed directly over url
...... 100 such renames with no useful change....
Renamed m99 to m100 committed directly over url
Make couple of commits to m100
Merge m100 to trunk without giving any revision range. Somehow my merge
fails in between, i.e after merging 37 location segments.

I will see what causes it to fail or I will reduce the above exercise to
 30 odd segments and compare between win32 and Linux.

With regards
Kamesh Jayachandran

J J wrote:
> Did you start the merge at '27/Jun/2008:08:15:31' or '2008/06/27 07:54:02'?
>> According to the linestamp output, I started the command at Fri Jun 27
>> 07:52:55 2008. The access log entry at 07:54 was the first entry
>> after 07:52 that appeared in the log.
> What is the exact merge command you used for the above?
> My guess is you do 'svn merge http://host/svn/TESTREPO/branches/RB-25.x'.
>> Yes, that is the command I used.
> I guess RB-25.x has the following ancestry
> /trunk:2-6
> /branches/RB-19.4.x:7-9
> /branches/RB-20.x:10-521
> /branches/RB-21.x:522-1005
> /branches/TASK-eES-RB-21.x:1006-1079
> /branches/RB-21.0.2.x:1080-1086
> /branches/RB-22.x:1087-1480
> /branches/RB-23.x:1481-1516
> /branches/TASK-eES-RB-23.x:1517-1901
> /branches/RB-24.x:1902-1913
> /branches/RB-23.1.x:1914-2212
> /tags/REL-
> /branches/RB-23.1.1.x:2227-2378
> /branches/RB-25.x:2379-2758
> /ees/branches/RB-25.x:2763-2773
> Whenever you do the above merge it does some no-op processing for all of
> the above location segments.
>> Yes, that is what I gather from the access log and from the neon debug
>> log. I've attached a grep of the neon debug log that only shows lines
>> that match "ees/branches/". Hopefully that will help some.
> As we are not 'operationally logging the location segments report', we
> could not see entries in the operational log.
> But still it does not answer how things are fast in UNIX.
> With regards
> Kamesh Jayachandran
> J J wrote:
>>>>> I have rerun the merge and attached svn-action.log and svn-access.log.
>>>> Once more with the attachments.
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-07-02 22:30:32 CEST

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.