You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by surendra M <su...@gmail.com> on 2006/10/27 18:33:25 UTC
performance CVS Vs SVN
Having an idea of migrating my repository from PVCS to CVS or SVN
I did an evalution.
I could see some mail posts discussing the performnace of CVS Vs SVN.
But they were carried out on old version of CVS and SVN.
This is the test Environment
------------------------------------------
versions : CVS 1.11.22 and SVN 1.4.0
Both were installed on the same box (OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4).
Both repositories located on the same box and set up using the same
set of files(around 7000 files).
Both were tested remotly from a windows machine (P4,2.8GHz,512 MB RAM).
Acess mode : Used pserver for CVS and svnserve for SVN.
And SVN repository fs type : FSFS
Check-in test
-------------
I selected same set of files (2000 files) from both the repositories
to create revisons.Created 100 revisons on each of these files. If you
pick up x.java file from both CVS and SVN, both will be having same
content and same number of revisions.
check-in stats
--------------
1. When network traffic (Business hours) is more and windows work
station is occupied with many other programs (Page File size is
around 510 MB ).
SVN : 413.34 418.80 403.98 (All in seconds)(2000 files checked-in)
CVS : 45.05 43.41 53.27 (All in seconds)(2000 files checked-in)
2. When network traffic (non Business hours) is less and windows work
station is occupied with few other programs (Page File size is
around 350 MB ).
(All in seconds)(2000 files checked-in)
SVN : 117.36 138.16 129.75 115.30 112.84 116.00
CVS : 54.72 38.14 42.17 39.66 38.86
3. More Network traffic and Page File size : 355 MB
SVN: 188.50 108.84 229.91 118.72
CVS: 60.05 46.08 46.24
Check-out test
--------------
Used the above same set of (2000)files. Checkout by specifying
path of 20 directories. Each directory may contain 50 - 300 files,
totaling 2000 files.
More Network traffic(Business hours) and Page File size : 355 MB
SVN : 112.35 101.95 114.46 99.90
CVS : 39.24 43.84 47.31 45.55 47.27
Any experiments/evaluations on SVN 1.4 ?
Is the above performance is expected?
Is there any experiments/stats available on Updates?
--Suren
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by Bob Proulx <bo...@proulx.com>.
surendra M wrote:
> Is the above performance is expected?
MS-Windows is known to have slow filesystem performance and this
negatively impacts subversion on that platform because subversion
creates a full pristine tree in the .svn directory. If you benchmark
on a platform with a faster filesystem (e.g. GNU/Linux, Unix, etc.)
then performance of subversion is hugely improved.
Bob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by Michael Haggerty <mh...@alum.mit.edu>.
surendra M wrote:
> Agree.
> But our build process heavily depends on tags. It'll checkout/update all
> the specified tags
> and prepares a build file. And if I adopt to SVN instead of CVS I may
> need to change my
> build process too. How easy it is to migrate tags from PVCS/CVS to SVN ?
> And are we
> able to migrate as expected? If got chance please look for the thread
> "*simulating tags like* *CVS*" posted by me.
The cvs2svn migration tool (http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/) converts CVS
tags to SVN 'tags' just fine.
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by Bob Hiestand <bo...@gmail.com>.
On 11/6/06, Les Mikesell <le...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 15:27 -0500, surendra M wrote:
> > But our build process heavily depends on tags. It'll checkout/update
> > all the specified tags and prepares a build file. And if I adopt to
> > SVN instead of CVS I may need to change my build process too. How easy
> > it is to migrate tags from PVCS/CVS to SVN ? And are we able to
> > migrate
> > as expected?
>
> That's going to depend on how you set the tags. In CVS, you can
> float tags to new locations and always have known names for current
> and n-1, n-2, etc. build tags. I don't think there is any equivalent
> in SVN so the build process must be told about the tag to use and
> some external logging process used to track them.
Does "floating tags" in this context mean creating a list of files
that transparently tracks HEAD? You could do this in subversion with
symlinks and svn:externals (at least on a UNIX system).
If you're talking about updating existing tags, that's possible in
subversion as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by Les Mikesell <le...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 15:27 -0500, surendra M wrote:
> But our build process heavily depends on tags. It'll checkout/update
> all the specified tags and prepares a build file. And if I adopt to
> SVN instead of CVS I may need to change my build process too. How easy
> it is to migrate tags from PVCS/CVS to SVN ? And are we able to
> migrate
> as expected?
That's going to depend on how you set the tags. In CVS, you can
float tags to new locations and always have known names for current
and n-1, n-2, etc. build tags. I don't think there is any equivalent
in SVN so the build process must be told about the tag to use and
some external logging process used to track them.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by surendra M <su...@gmail.com>.
Agree.
But our build process heavily depends on tags. It'll checkout/update all the
specified tags
and prepares a build file. And if I adopt to SVN instead of CVS I may need
to change my
build process too. How easy it is to migrate tags from PVCS/CVS to SVN ? And
are we
able to migrate as expected? If got chance please look for the thread
"*simulating
tags like* *CVS*" posted by me.
On 10/28/06, Dmitri Colebatch <di...@colebatch.com> wrote:
>
> We're about to change from CVS to SVN and one of the major factors in the
> time taken to lay a tag. We have a large CVS repository with several years
> worth of archives. Tagging takes minutes as opposed to seconds for SVN.
>
> cheers
> dim
>
>
> On 10/29/06, Kevin Greiner <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/27/06, surendra M < surendrahere@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Having an idea of migrating my repository from PVCS to CVS or SVN
> > > I did an evalution.
> > > I could see some mail posts discussing the performnace of CVS Vs SVN.
> > > But they were carried out on old version of CVS and SVN.
> > >
> >
> >
> > When my company recently switched to version control software, CVS was a
> > complete non-starter due to lack of rename support and non-atomic committs.
> > It doesn't matter how much faster CVS is, if it doesn't do what you need.
> >
>
>
--
regards
Suren
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by Dmitri Colebatch <di...@colebatch.com>.
We're about to change from CVS to SVN and one of the major factors in the
time taken to lay a tag. We have a large CVS repository with several years
worth of archives. Tagging takes minutes as opposed to seconds for SVN.
cheers
dim
On 10/29/06, Kevin Greiner <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/27/06, surendra M <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Having an idea of migrating my repository from PVCS to CVS or SVN
> > I did an evalution.
> > I could see some mail posts discussing the performnace of CVS Vs SVN.
> > But they were carried out on old version of CVS and SVN.
> >
>
>
> When my company recently switched to version control software, CVS was a
> complete non-starter due to lack of rename support and non-atomic committs.
> It doesn't matter how much faster CVS is, if it doesn't do what you need.
>
Re: performance CVS Vs SVN
Posted by Kevin Greiner <gr...@gmail.com>.
On 10/27/06, surendra M <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Having an idea of migrating my repository from PVCS to CVS or SVN
> I did an evalution.
> I could see some mail posts discussing the performnace of CVS Vs SVN.
> But they were carried out on old version of CVS and SVN.
>
When my company recently switched to version control software, CVS was a
complete non-starter due to lack of rename support and non-atomic committs.
It doesn't matter how much faster CVS is, if it doesn't do what you need.