On 2/10/2012 10:21 AM, Bruce Lysik wrote:
Hi,
I'm considering deploying 3 front-ends, all mounting the same SAN volume
for repo. (The SAN handle flock() and fnctl() correctly.) These 3 FEs
would be load balanced by a Citrix Netscaler. (At least for http(s).)
The largest issues I've run into us
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 4:10 AM, Ravi Roy wrote:
> > Hello community,
> >
> > I have compiled subversion 1.6.17 and Apache 2.2.21 from source on CentOS
> > 5.6 and serving my repository using Apache httpd server with the
> following
> >
I finally got around to putting these up on github.com. I've submitted
these to repoforge, and will submit them to Fedora. These are the bits
and pieces necessary to build clean RPM's for RHEL 5, RHEL 6, and
recent Fedora releases of subversion-1.7.2.
The irony of publishing Subversion patches on
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:27 PM, André Hänsel wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> can I use svnserve in daemon mode (to take advantage of its authorization
> mechanisms) and still have the client use an SSH tunnel (probably with
> different credentials) to connect to it, so I only have to expose the SSH
> port?
You should look into either svn+ssh:// or using svnserve over ssh port
forwarding ('ssh -L'). These are two distinct options. The former is
documented in the book; some of the SSH set-up tips there are applicable
to both modes.
André Hänsel wrote on Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 03:27:12 +0100:
> Hi list,
Hi list,
can I use svnserve in daemon mode (to take advantage of its authorization
mechanisms) and still have the client use an SSH tunnel (probably with
different credentials) to connect to it, so I only have to expose the SSH
port?
I found a post at http://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2004-12/1413
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> I would be *extremely* leery of this kind of multiple simultaneous
> write access to a shared resource. Even with a SAN, filesystem changes
> on one system are vulnerable to phase delays or interruptions, and
> there have been way, way,
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 04:47:31PM -0600, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> So thinking all this through, I agree svnsync does not make sense if
>> you are hosting a repository on a SAN and trying to connect multiple
>> svn servers to it. But it sound
The current storage isn't on the SAN, so yes, we believe the new storage will
be faster. It's already many repositories, not a single one, so we're already
in good shape there.
--
Bruce Z. Lysik
From: Les Mikesell
To: Bruce Lysik
Cc: "users@subversion.ap
> So you're running a master/slave setup with a write-through proxy
> configuration, yes? You don't mention whether you're quoting logs
> from the master or from the slave server.
>
I apologize; yes I am running master/slave setup with a write-trough
proxy.
Logs belong to Master.
>
> Is the
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 04:36:46PM +0530, Ravi Roy wrote:
> I found this under
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=193527
> in the mail archive of dated back to 2002 and this seems to be fixed as per
> the bug report.
>
> Can somebody please comment on the is
I found this under
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=193527
in the mail archive of dated back to 2002 and this seems to be fixed as per
the bug report.
Can somebody please comment on the issue?
Thanks.
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Ravi Roy wrote:
> H
Hello community,
I have compiled subversion 1.6.17 and Apache 2.2.21 from source on CentOS
5.6 and serving my repository using Apache httpd server with the following
details :
Server version: Apache/2.2.21 (Unix)
Server loaded: APR 1.4.5, APR-Util 1.3.12
Compiled using: APR 1.4.5, APR-Util 1.3.1
13 matches
Mail list logo
