Richard Pfeiffer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it just the ADD/COMMIT over an NFS that would
cause the corruption, and, presuming an as-of-yet
uncorrupted repository, doing a CHECK-OUT over an
NFS mounted repository would NOT cause
corruption;
A 'cvs add' should not be a huge problem as only
Richard Pfeiffer writes:
Is it just the ADD/COMMIT over an NFS that would
cause the corruption, and, presuming an as-of-yet
uncorrupted repository, doing a CHECK-OUT over an
NFS mounted repository would NOT cause
corruption;
Mostly correct -- it's opertions that modify the RCS files in the
Is it just the ADD/COMMIT over an NFS that would
cause the corruption, and, presuming an as-of-yet
uncorrupted repository, doing a CHECK-OUT over an
NFS mounted repository would NOT cause
corruption;
or
would/could a CHECK-OUT over an as-of-yet
uncorrupted NFS mounted repository also cause a
Richard Pfeiffer writes:
Would anyone happen to know of any test
comparison cases (pserver connection vs actual
mount) regarding this or have any opinions on the
subject?
Check the archives -- I'm sure there have been reports in the past of
pserver being faster than NFS. (And that only
I know it's not advised to NFS mount the cvs
repository to the machine on which the cvs binary
resides. However, we have a user group that is
convinced we have to do so for speed reasons.
(Doing updates of a massive repository approx.
every 25 minutes)
Would anyone happen to know of any test
