On 10 June 2010 06:34, Richard England <rlengland_at_verizon.net> wrote:
> On 06/08/2010 01:48 AM, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>
> On Saturday 05 June 2010, Richard England wrote:
>
>
> Are there any possible repercussions of having two server both running
> Apache/SVN (same version) accessing the same database files? This is
> using FSFS.
>
> Is this likely to cause data corruption or anything nasty?
>
>
> You can easily have multiple concurrent accesses even without running two
> Apaches, e.g. concurrent file accesses by different users on the same
> machine, different svn+ssh sessions, multiple svnserve instances spawned by
> [x]inetd etc.
>
> In other words, it works.
>
> Uli
>
>
>
>
> Andy, the rationale is to allow a team to migrate from one server to
> another over time rather than forcing them to move their working copies
> before it makes sense in their development process. They are aware they can
> use "svn switch --relocate" to update the working copes but this would make
> it a little more palatable for them.
>
> Than you Andy, and Uli.
>
> --
> ------------------------------
> *~~R*
>
Why not just have the old server issue a 301/302 to the new server location
(I can never remember which is moved permanently)?
-Stephen
Received on 2010-06-10 08:14:23 CEST