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

Re: Chained svns

From: John Doe <jdmls_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:38:04 -0700 (PDT)

> Just remember that "svn update" is not an atomic operation. It could
> fail in the middle somewhere for whatever reason, leaving your web
> site's working copy in an inconsistent state. Even if it doesn't fail
> anywhere, for the duration that the update is running, your working
> copy is inconsistent. This is why I find it better to update a
> working copy the web site doesn't know about, then repoint a symlink,
> since changing a symlink is very quick, compared with the time it
> takes to update a working copy. And repointing several symlinks will
> still be very much faster than updating several working copies.
> > Does snvsync handle updates as patches too?
> Yes.
> > Like, if I change 1 line in 500 1000000 lines files, will it
> > transfer 500 one line diffs or the whole 500 files?
> It will transfer just the diff.
> As it was explained to me by Ben Collins-Sussman, svnsync effectively
> checks out each revision from the source repository and commits it to
> the destination repository.

I agree with you about the symlink being faster/safer, but the devs have decided...

Thx again for your help,


To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-09-25 10:38:34 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.