On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Ari S <sadarjoen_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
>> I would assume that VisualSVN is largely the same (does not customize
>> its binaries). I know they toss in some Windows-specific tools and
>> configuration UI. My guess is that VisualSVN is configuring Apache
>> for Windows authentication or something like that. So to do a real
>> comparison, you would need to configure the Apache server provided in
>> the CollabNet distribution to do something similar. Or conversely, if
>> the VisualSVN server allows you to use plain Apache authentication
>> then you could try it that way.
>
> Thanks for your reply!
> I did set up VisualSVN _and_ CollabNet such that they both use Apache
> authentication.
> Without that the difference was even 100% (VisualSVN twice as slow as
> Collabnet).
>
VisualSVN Server is just properly compiled and packaged original
Subversion. So you shouldn't have difference in performance between
VisualSVN Server and CollabNet.
Could you please provide a little bit more information about your
configuration: server os, client os, IPv4 or IPv4, etc. What operation
you are used to measure peformance?
--
Ivan Zhakov
VisualSVN Team
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=2401707
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-09-29 18:42:45 CEST