On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Matt Welland <estifo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ...know to just try again on the occasional update fail due to a busy
>> fossil. A more graceful fail or better yet a wait and retry would be nice
>> but recovery is as simple as up-arrow, enter.
>>
>
> i've been bitten by NFS-related deficiencies enough times that i try to
> stay away from NFS if i can (nothing to do with sqlite3 - completely other
> problems, most of which were so long ago that they have certainly been
> resolved in the mean time). Had i realized that our new www dir was on an
> NFS i wouldn't have tried placing fossil there in the first place.
> Actually, i'm glad the problem showed up immediately - that certainly saved
> me time compared to me having to track down the problem later ("but it
> worked yesterday...").
>
My concern is that if the answer to all network based filesystem issues is
"use local disk" then that may unnecessarily turn people away. If this is a
real bug (and it sounds like it may be) then those of us forced to work on
NFS etc. would benefit from it being fixed before the next official release.
>
> Fossil isn't perfect (I'd love to see fossil mv behave the same as Unix
>> mv) but NFS has generally not been an issue. I'v not seen this error and it
>> might be either a regression or new issue.
>>
>
> It was the first time i saw it, but it didn't occur to me to check if i
> was on NFS until i was halfway done posting.
>
>
>> In short, I think fossil usually works fine on NFS. The caveat might be
>> *which* NFS. We see different NFS issues with sqlite3 locking depending on
>> what tier or vendor your server is.
>>
>
> Since i'm the one who'll have to end up dealing with the support requests,
> i went for the approach which moved the .fsl file out of the NFS ;).
>
You are fortunate to have that luxury :)
>
>
>> Aside: on my home system I use fossil on MooseFS which has worse locking
>> than NFS. Performance is slower than running on local disk but still in the
>> sub second range for most operations. So long as you don't access the
>> fossil file simultaneously from two different hosts there are no locking or
>> crashing issues that I've seen.
>>
>> This is all with version 1.25.
>>
>
> You haven't convinced me - i'm still nervous around NFS ;).
>
As well you should be. NFS can be a challenge but it is also very
convenient. I hope the fossil developers are open to some level of support
to using fossil on networked file systems.
>
> --
> ----- stephan beal
> http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
> http://gplus.to/sgbeal
>
> _______________________________________________
> fossil-users mailing list
> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
>
>
--
Matt
-=-
90% of the nations wealth is held by 2% of the people. Bummer to be in the
majority...
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
