On 10 June 2010 06:34, Richard England <rlengl...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 06/08/2010 01:48 AM, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote: > > On Saturday 05 June 2010, Richard England wrote: > > > Are there any possible repercussions of having two server both running > Apache/SVN (same version) accessing the same database files? This is > using FSFS. > > Is this likely to cause data corruption or anything nasty? > > > You can easily have multiple concurrent accesses even without running two > Apaches, e.g. concurrent file accesses by different users on the same > machine, different svn+ssh sessions, multiple svnserve instances spawned by > [x]inetd etc. > > In other words, it works. > > Uli > > > > > Andy, the rationale is to allow a team to migrate from one server to > another over time rather than forcing them to move their working copies > before it makes sense in their development process. They are aware they can > use "svn switch --relocate" to update the working copes but this would make > it a little more palatable for them. > > Than you Andy, and Uli. > > -- > ------------------------------ > *~~R* > Why not just have the old server issue a 301/302 to the new server location (I can never remember which is moved permanently)? -Stephen
