Re: Scalability Testing This Week (was: Re: Repos corruption continued)

[Mike Mason <mg...@thoughtworks.net>]

C. Michael Pilato wrote:

>
>>Also, I'm soliciting opinions on how concerned I should be about all the
>>buzz re: repository corruption.  I have 3 code bases.  One is about 30,000
>>files, one is about 10,000 files, and one is about 2000 files.  (These are
>>'C' and C++ sources and headers, makefiles, perl scripts, etc, used to
>>cross compile code for embedded cards in our printers).
>>    
>>
>
>To this, I dunno what to say.  Subversion has been hosting its own
>source code for years now, with (thank you, God) not a single case of
>repository corruption.  In all the previous scalability testing I've
>performed, I've never been able to corrupt a Subversion repository.
>  
>
I've got 6 developers working on an 8,000 file repository, merging 
changes from another (bigger) team so regularly changing several hundred 
files. Never had any corruption problems, never had any performance 
problems. I realise this isn't 120 users and 30,000 files, but it 
definitely signals to me that Subversion pretty much works. I'd trust it 
as much as CVS, and more than VSS or StarTeam, but less than Perforce 
(which rocks, but costs money).

The only problem I've had is the Windows client "access denied" 
problems, but there's a workaround being put into place for that.

Cheers,
Mike.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org