----- Original Message ----- > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Roman Naumenko < ro...@naumenko.ca > > wrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Mark Phippard < > > > markp...@gmail.com > > > > > > > I remember this. The deadly operation was the initial checkout on > > > network based file systems, especially CIFS on the Windows boxes. > > > The > > > few servers that ran NFS acted much more like Linux hosts, or > > > like > > > Linux hosts usin gNFS. A number of changes in Subversion, over > > > time, > > > reduced the perfidious chattiness that hampered CIFS baed > > > checkouts, > > > > and all Windows users with network mounted working copies became > > > > *much* happier. > > > > > > > > Let's do be careful to draw distinctions between local file > > > systems, > > > > like NTFS and ext4, and network file systems like CIFS and NFS. > > > I'm > > > > afraid it's common to handwave those away as not making a > > > difference, > > > > and they really do. > > Maybe windows users are happier (they are not), but Linux users are > > just scratching their heads over svn performance. > > > svn, version 1.7.8 (r1419691), standard redhat vm. > > > NFS: > > > A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/scratch-pad.txt > > > A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/use-cases-resolution.txt > > > A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/design-overview.txt > > > A benchmark-svn/trunk/notes/tree-conflicts/detection.txt > > > ^Csvn: E200015: Caught signal > > > real 0m26.980s > > > user 0m0.454s > > > sys 0m1.281s > > > [11:02:30 user@host:~/svn_tests ] $ du -sh benchmark-svn > > > 12M benchmark-svn > > > Local: > > > A > > /tmp/benchmark-svn/branches/1.6.x/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/bdb/reps-table.c > > > A > > /tmp/benchmark-svn/branches/1.6.x/subversion/libsvn_fs_base/bdb/bdb_compat.h > > > ^Csvn: E200015: Caught signal > > > real 0m13.241s > > > user 0m3.939s > > > sys 0m4.731s > > > [11:02:30 user@host:~/svn_tests ] $ du -sh /tmp/benchmark-svn > > > 144M /tmp/benchmark-svn > > > What we've got here, 20x or something? > > That was a known consequence of moving to SQLite for storage of the > metadata. SVN 1.8 offers a solution for those that can use it: > http://subversion.apache.org/docs/release-notes/1.8.html#exclusivelocking Mark, thank for the link. There is indeed a nice performance boost to the client with exclusive access. --Roman
