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

RE: repo on Windows -- why not?

From: Michael Hüttermann <michael_at_huettermann.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 15:23:56 +0200

 thank you all for your feedback. I've incorporated your comments.
 It would really be bad to prefer SVN as the VCS in a book, but writing
 counterproductive or misleading things, so I'm really glad that you've
 If someone is interested in seeing that printed, the book is "Agile
 ALM", and will be printed in May (Manning).


 Am Freitag, den 22.04.2011, 10:13 +0200 schrieb
> Bob Archer wrote on 04/22/2011 09:39:03 AM:
> >
> > > in most cases, you don't want to host a SVN repository on
> Windows.
> >
> > Why? We are a windows "shop" and we have windows servers and we
> host
> > on windows. I've seen zero problems. I think this type of anti-ms
> > FUD is going to be bad for svn if it is widely said and published.
> One big reason is that 64-bit apache is not as mainstream on Windows.
> There are open source builds, and there is now a 64-bit mod_dav_svn
> available on Windows, but neither collabnet or wandisco say more
> than "coming soon".
> I regularly see Apache use >8GB of RAM on one of our 64-bit
> windows servers during some large repo transactions. This is
> not just cache usage. When it was running under a 32-bit
> apache it just kept hard crashing apache when it hit 2GB
> of RAM usage, which disconnects all user sessions. Not nice...
> That being said, once moving to a 64-bit apache on windows
> things have been much more stable. Our unix servers (on the
> same caliber of hardware) are handling a lot more load than
> windows, but I don't have any specific performance stats
> to prove that windows is the limiting factor.
> Kevin R.
Received on 2011-04-24 15:24:25 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.