Re: Active-Active Clustering with Subversion

On May 7, 2010, at 10:26, BD wrote:

> I'm starting a new project to consolidate all svn repos across our company into a single instance. Originally we looked at doing a active-passive cluster, but after looking at the loads on the current individual svn repos, we are thinking that an active-active cluster would be preferable.
>
> My question is, is it possible/safe to have two apache/svn nodes accessing the same repo on the same storage system, shared out via nfs v3? Of course the repo DB will formated with type FSFS, but we are concerned about data corruption with multiple nodes doing commits to the same repo. Does anyone have any experience using svn in this or a similar configuration?

Hosting a repo on NFS can work, but so many people write here for help after trying to do so and finding it doesn't work for them. It depends on whether your NFS implementation supports proper locking.

I've been told before that to do active-active clustering, you would want to have the repository data located on a cluster filesystem (e.g. Apple Xsan) accessed by both servers. Otherwise data corruption would indeed be a concern.

But, these days, you could have a simpler setup with two (or more) standalone servers which mirror each other's contents using svnsync. Write requests would have to happen on a single master server only, but the mirrors could be configured with a writethrough proxy to make this transparent. You should be able to find documentation on setting these up.
Received on 2010-05-07 17:51:20 CEST