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

Re: Subversion 1.6.0 Release Candidate 3 Released

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 12:10:16 -0600

On Mar 4, 2009, at 12:07 PM, Gleason, Todd wrote:

>> Do you have to be running a process to use these? The nice thing
>> about FSEvents is that (IIUC) you can just subscribe the the
>> directory, quit your process, and then comeback later and ask it what
>> changed. It might take some selling to convince the devs and the
>> users that a daemon is needed for Subversion.
>> -Hyrum
> Yes, as far as I can tell you must run a process.
> The need to have a daemon (or service, to use Windows terminology) is
> exactly why I suggested that this be optional. I expect most users
> would want it installed for the better performance, but some might
> not,
> or might want to toggle it on and off.
> Re: FSEvents, it's tough for me to read
> http://developer.apple.com/DOCUMENTATION/DARWIN/Reference/FSEvents_Ref/F
> SEvents/index.html but it does seem as though you're correct about
> being
> able to come back later since the change events are stored
> persistently.
> (Based on my reading, I politely if a little naively disagree with Bob
> Archer's subsequent response on this thread.)
> But personally, I'd be worried if this went on too long (say the user
> adds, rewrites, and deletes files like crazy without touching svn--
> does
> the persistent change information fill the filesystem?). I would
> rather
> have a daemon consuming the FSEvents data whenever possible, or not
> use
> it at all.
> One other thing: The wiki at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FSEvents
> compared FSEvents to the Linux inotify at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inotify. From what I can tell, inotify
> operates more similarly to how Windows does--no persistence that I can
> see.
> No idea about other OS's, but since this functionality isn't something
> you can count on everywhere, obviously svn must work without it.
> However, with it, a lot of client operations could see tremendous
> performance boosts. I even saw a link
> (http://markmail.org/message/vmigwu3wfxsy7r7z) where they talked about
> FSEvents for Mercurial, so I'm glad to hear that the svn developers
> are
> considering this capability.

Well, in this case "the svn developers" = "me", so don't hold your
breath for this anytime soon. :)



To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-03-04 19:20:23 CET

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.