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

Re: Is there ever a good reason to lock down the repo when performing a copy (no, right?)

From: David Weintraub <qazwart_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 23:35:01 -0400

If you are doing a copy with in a working directory, you aren't
touching the repository, so you aren't interfering with other commits.

If you are doing a copy to a URL, that is an atomic operation, so your
copy will complete before anyone else can commit their changes to
Subversion. I think your fear is that if I am copying a lot of stuff,
it must take a long time. Well, if you're doing a copy from one URL to
another URL, the operation is extremely short because it only needs to
create a single pointer from one Subversion repository directory to

For example, creating a branch is done via "svn cp". I have a
repository that I converted from CVS to Subversion. In CVS, it takes
20 minutes to create the branch. In Subversion, the same operation
takes less than a second to complete.

I hope this eases your concerns.

David Weintraub
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:53 PM, Matthew Russell
<matthew.russell_at_digitalreasoning.com> wrote:
> Hello - I'm having trouble finding something that definitively says that svn
> copy works in such a way that you should never have to lock down the repo
> during a large copy for fear of someone committing during your copy and,
> thus, compromising the integrity of the copy somehow by introducing a new
> revision.
> I think the fear from our support folks might be two-fold: 1) that the
> commit during the copy would somehow result in corruption, and 2) that the
> commit would mix up revision numbers and the copy would somehow end up being
> two different revisions.
> It stands to reason that svn copy would work strictly on a revision (even if
> you specify HEAD, which is still a specific revision when svn copy is
> invoked), which would make the fact that someone else is committing during
> the copy a moot point. It also stands to reason that everything is handled
> by a transaction with svn, so unless I'm wrong, that pretty much covers the
> issues, right?
> Again - it's not me (no, really!) that needs convincing. It's just that the
> lack of "it's ok to commit during an in-progress copy" being written in
> stone somewhere has spooked people around here.
> Any pointers on anything else that might be helpful to dispelling this
> issue?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-08-17 05:35:29 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.