Campbell Allan wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 May 2011, Dave Tingling wrote:
>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> We administer subversion (v 1.4.2, r22196 on CentOS 5.5) for a
>> development company, and have over 150 active repositories, but we are
>> not subversion experts. We are experiencing an issue with just one
>> particular repository.
>>
>> When programmers run an update against this one repository (using either
>> TortoiseSVN 1.6.15 or Slik Subversion 1.6.16 on Windows 7 Pro SP1), they
>> observe that they sometimes get---to coin their term---"frankenstein"
>> versions of arbitrary files. As an example scenario:
>>
>> 1) - Developer A: adds, edits and commits a file X,
>> 2) - Developer A: later, again edits and commits file X,
>> 3) - Developer A: still later, again edits and commits file X,
>> 4) - Developer N: who has never before seen file X, runs an update. She
>> gets a weird version of file X which contains only *some* lines of the
>> set of changes made by Developer A in each of the edit/commit sessions
>> (1), (2), and (3).
>>
>> We cannot replicate the problem on demand, but it recurs with
>> (seemingly) random files at random times. The worst thing is that when
>> an update silently "reverts" some unknown file (to a "frankenstein"
>> version), it is subsequently committed as a new version by the
>> unsuspecting developer.
>>
>> We've tried exporting and re-importing the code to a new repository, but
>> the issue has persisted. "Svnadmin verify" finds no errors in any
>> revisions. Our latest move was to disable the Windows Search service,
>> but if that's really the problem, our other developers should be seeing
>> this with other repositories. Any advice on how to
>> duplicate/troubleshoot the cause of this problem will be greatly
>> appreciated.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Dave
>>
> Hi, I've seen something like this before when some of the users were remote nd
> were accessing the repository via a SVK mirror. The mirror was reverting
> files prior to committing to what I presume it thought the state should be.
> This was some years ago, but if I recall correctly the commits for the
> reverted files did not have any commit message. I don't know if it was an
> artifact of the setup we had (I never did the setup) but commits coming via
> the SVK mirror would be from a single user but the real user would be part of
> the commit message. Could something like this be happening for you?
>
> Campbell
>
>
Thanks Campbell. No remote users, no SVK mirror in place, nor anything
intermediate between the server and clients.
-Dave
Received on 2011-05-11 18:37:59 CEST