You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name> on 2006/03/25 09:51:02 UTC
svn cleanup performance
Hi all,
(I've searched the archives but was unable to find an answer or
discussion on this)
we've got an svn repository with ~70000 files and directories. Updating
it on a daily basis takes a long time (so I've put that into a cron).
However, occasionally, errors occur and I have to svn cleanup.
I noticed that `svn cleanup` at the root of the repository takes
_really_ long time (more than 30 minutes) and eats up up to 200 MB of
RAM.
Is there any way to tweak this, to make it faster and/or slimmer (apart
from making sure only to work on smaller sub-trees of the repo)? I
assume this is server-independent; my box is a FreeBSD box, but it also
occurs on various Linux boxes.
Regards,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>.
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 14:59 +0100, Alex Kiesel wrote:
> > 7000 files is one thing. How big is the repository in disk size? And are
> > most of the files in one directory? Linux ext2 or ext3 filesystems before
> > the 2.6 kernel would take quite some time to deal with many thousands of
> > files in one directory, for example.
>
> Disk size of the repo is %%% GB. There are no directories with really
^^^ = 1.8 GB on the client
Sorry :)
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>.
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 12:39 -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> > I need a cleanup on root because I do an (interrupted) update on root...
> > Our layout requires having the complete repo checked out, at least for
> > those that want to maintain release branches.
>
> Obviously I don't know your requirements, but this would be very
> unusual. I can see a branch maintainer might want both the trunk and
> the branch checked out, but you should think about whether they really
> need every other branch and every tag as well.
I can elaborate on why I chose this setup if you like, but I think it's
actually not really related to the problem here.
> If you can reduce the size of your checkouts by a large factor, I think
> you'll find everything goes faster.
I agree that the long cleanup time is directly related to the vast
number of files. So, is this a "limitation" of subversion (it's not
really a limitation, because it still can handle the repository - but it
takes it time).
Also, does someone know why the cleanup takes up so much memory?
Regards,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Duncan Murdoch <mu...@stats.uwo.ca>.
On 3/25/2006 10:16 AM, Alex Kiesel wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 09:57 -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>>> Disk size of the repo is %%% GB. There are no directories with really
>>> many files, the maximum is probably 100 files per dir.
>>> One reason the repo grew so big was that when converting from CVS, all
>>> tags became real directories, and as we had many tags, the number of
>>> files was multiplied.
>> Why would you be doing a cleanup on the root? You shouldn't normally
>> have the root checked out in the usual trunk/branches/tags structure,
>> you just check out one of (or maybe a few of) the trunk, a branch, or a
>> tag.
>
> I need a cleanup on root because I do an (interrupted) update on root...
> Our layout requires having the complete repo checked out, at least for
> those that want to maintain release branches.
Obviously I don't know your requirements, but this would be very
unusual. I can see a branch maintainer might want both the trunk and
the branch checked out, but you should think about whether they really
need every other branch and every tag as well.
If you can reduce the size of your checkouts by a large factor, I think
you'll find everything goes faster.
Duncan Murdoch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>.
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 09:57 -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> > Disk size of the repo is %%% GB. There are no directories with really
> > many files, the maximum is probably 100 files per dir.
> > One reason the repo grew so big was that when converting from CVS, all
> > tags became real directories, and as we had many tags, the number of
> > files was multiplied.
>
> Why would you be doing a cleanup on the root? You shouldn't normally
> have the root checked out in the usual trunk/branches/tags structure,
> you just check out one of (or maybe a few of) the trunk, a branch, or a
> tag.
I need a cleanup on root because I do an (interrupted) update on root...
Our layout requires having the complete repo checked out, at least for
those that want to maintain release branches.
Regards,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Duncan Murdoch <mu...@stats.uwo.ca>.
On 3/25/2006 8:59 AM, Alex Kiesel wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 08:49 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> Alex Kiesel wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> (I've searched the archives but was unable to find an answer or
>>> discussion on this)
>>>
>>> we've got an svn repository with ~70000 files and directories.
>>> Updating it on a daily basis takes a long time (so I've put that into
>>> a cron). However, occasionally, errors occur and I have to svn
>>> cleanup.
>> 7000 files is one thing. How big is the repository in disk size? And are
>> most of the files in one directory? Linux ext2 or ext3 filesystems before
>> the 2.6 kernel would take quite some time to deal with many thousands of
>> files in one directory, for example.
>
> Disk size of the repo is %%% GB. There are no directories with really
> many files, the maximum is probably 100 files per dir.
> One reason the repo grew so big was that when converting from CVS, all
> tags became real directories, and as we had many tags, the number of
> files was multiplied.
Why would you be doing a cleanup on the root? You shouldn't normally
have the root checked out in the usual trunk/branches/tags structure,
you just check out one of (or maybe a few of) the trunk, a branch, or a
tag.
Duncan Murdoch
>
>>> I noticed that `svn cleanup` at the root of the repository takes
>>> _really_ long time (more than 30 minutes) and eats up up to 200 MB of
>>> RAM.
>>>
>>> Is there any way to tweak this, to make it faster and/or slimmer
>>> (apart from making sure only to work on smaller sub-trees of the
>>> repo)? I assume this is server-independent; my box is a FreeBSD box,
>>> but it also occurs on various Linux boxes.
>> Are you using bdb or fshs for the repository on the server? And which
>> particular version of subversion, with which particular FreeBSD release and
>> filesystem?
>
> We used to use bdb, but the server has lately been converted to fsfs. I
> am using subversion 1.3.x (client), FreeBSD 5.4, UFS2 with softupdates
> enabled.
>
> (However, the problem exists on Linux boxes, too).
>
> The server is a subversion 1.2.x, but as far as I understand, "cleanup"
> does not contact the server, does it?
>
> Regards,
> -Alex
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>.
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 08:49 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> Alex Kiesel wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > (I've searched the archives but was unable to find an answer or
> > discussion on this)
> >
> > we've got an svn repository with ~70000 files and directories.
> > Updating it on a daily basis takes a long time (so I've put that into
> > a cron). However, occasionally, errors occur and I have to svn
> > cleanup.
>
> 7000 files is one thing. How big is the repository in disk size? And are
> most of the files in one directory? Linux ext2 or ext3 filesystems before
> the 2.6 kernel would take quite some time to deal with many thousands of
> files in one directory, for example.
Disk size of the repo is %%% GB. There are no directories with really
many files, the maximum is probably 100 files per dir.
One reason the repo grew so big was that when converting from CVS, all
tags became real directories, and as we had many tags, the number of
files was multiplied.
> > I noticed that `svn cleanup` at the root of the repository takes
> > _really_ long time (more than 30 minutes) and eats up up to 200 MB of
> > RAM.
> >
> > Is there any way to tweak this, to make it faster and/or slimmer
> > (apart from making sure only to work on smaller sub-trees of the
> > repo)? I assume this is server-independent; my box is a FreeBSD box,
> > but it also occurs on various Linux boxes.
>
> Are you using bdb or fshs for the repository on the server? And which
> particular version of subversion, with which particular FreeBSD release and
> filesystem?
We used to use bdb, but the server has lately been converted to fsfs. I
am using subversion 1.3.x (client), FreeBSD 5.4, UFS2 with softupdates
enabled.
(However, the problem exists on Linux boxes, too).
The server is a subversion 1.2.x, but as far as I understand, "cleanup"
does not contact the server, does it?
Regards,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Nico Kadel-Garcia <nk...@comcast.net>.
Alex Kiesel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> (I've searched the archives but was unable to find an answer or
> discussion on this)
>
> we've got an svn repository with ~70000 files and directories.
> Updating it on a daily basis takes a long time (so I've put that into
> a cron). However, occasionally, errors occur and I have to svn
> cleanup.
7000 files is one thing. How big is the repository in disk size? And are
most of the files in one directory? Linux ext2 or ext3 filesystems before
the 2.6 kernel would take quite some time to deal with many thousands of
files in one directory, for example.
> I noticed that `svn cleanup` at the root of the repository takes
> _really_ long time (more than 30 minutes) and eats up up to 200 MB of
> RAM.
>
> Is there any way to tweak this, to make it faster and/or slimmer
> (apart from making sure only to work on smaller sub-trees of the
> repo)? I assume this is server-independent; my box is a FreeBSD box,
> but it also occurs on various Linux boxes.
Are you using bdb or fshs for the repository on the server? And which
particular version of subversion, with which particular FreeBSD release and
filesystem?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Miha Vitorovic <mv...@nil.si>.
Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name> wrote on 28.03.2006 14:14:58:
> On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 08:51 +0200, Miha Vitorovic wrote:
> >
> > Create an empty folder in your repository (named 'EMPTY', or something
> > like that), and then in your WC 'svn switch' all those folders that
you do
> > not need to point to 'EMPTY'. For many folder it may take a while, but
> > after that your update should run much faster.
>
> Hi,
>
> sounds interesting. I can't find the thread, do you have the subject or
> a link?
>
I used the haxx.se to search the lists. The thread that explained the
empty-dir is this one:
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-11/0451.shtml
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-11/0452.shtml
I couldn't find the more recent one.
Cheers,
---
Miha Vitorovic
Inženir v tehničnem področju
Customer Support Engineer
NIL Data Communications, Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Phone +386 1 4746 500 Fax +386 1 4746 501 http://www.NIL.si
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>.
On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 08:51 +0200, Miha Vitorovic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If you really feel you need to have entire repository checked out, you may
> also use the GCC trick (which was mentioned in another thread recently):
>
> Create an empty folder in your repository (named 'EMPTY', or something
> like that), and then in your WC 'svn switch' all those folders that you do
> not need to point to 'EMPTY'. For many folder it may take a while, but
> after that your update should run much faster.
Hi,
sounds interesting. I can't find the thread, do you have the subject or
a link?
Thanks,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Miha Vitorovic <mv...@nil.si>.
"Res Pons" <po...@hotmail.com> wrote on 26.03.2006 05:35:52:
> Thanks for the feedback. It's good to know that SVN doesn't have to run
on a
> dedicated server, I just used the old school of thought as Rational
people
> always recommended this method. So when I set up my new subversion
server I
> just took the same astringent approach. We have about 40 developers plus
> other departments who commit their .doc files or scripts to the server
too;
> so roughly about 70 users. It's a brand new enterprise Dell server with
4
> cpu's and 300 gb hard drive with raid mirroring. I really CMA. :)
>
Hi,
If you really feel you need to have entire repository checked out, you may
also use the GCC trick (which was mentioned in another thread recently):
Create an empty folder in your repository (named 'EMPTY', or something
like that), and then in your WC 'svn switch' all those folders that you do
not need to point to 'EMPTY'. For many folder it may take a while, but
after that your update should run much faster.
Cheers,
---
Miha Vitorovic
Inženir v tehničnem področju
Customer Support Engineer
NIL Data Communications, Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
Phone +386 1 4746 500 Fax +386 1 4746 501 http://www.NIL.si
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Res Pons <po...@hotmail.com>.
Thanks for the feedback. It's good to know that SVN doesn't have to run on a
dedicated server, I just used the old school of thought as Rational people
always recommended this method. So when I set up my new subversion server I
just took the same astringent approach. We have about 40 developers plus
other departments who commit their .doc files or scripts to the server too;
so roughly about 70 users. It's a brand new enterprise Dell server with 4
cpu's and 300 gb hard drive with raid mirroring. I really CMA. :)
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Andy Levy" <an...@gmail.com>
To: users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: Re: svn cleanup performance
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:43:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from tigris.org ([64.125.133.100]) by
bay0-mc5-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 25
Mar 2006 13:43:47 -0800
Received: (qmail 3008 invoked by uid 5000); 25 Mar 2006 21:43:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 2982 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2006 21:43:38 -0000
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jEHjJx36Oi8+Z3TmmkSEdPtfpLB7P/ybN8=
Mailing-List: contact users-help@subversion.tigris.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
list-help: <ma...@subversion.tigris.org>
list-unsubscribe: <ma...@subversion.tigris.org>
list-post: <ma...@subversion.tigris.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list users@subversion.tigris.org
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
b=dHAMaewljofulCJROh1Xz93r1dgodSbGK7pxyawlnHq7Aw9cHldcpy8oBwAfpUgDDYniTRqsMvIDmvnd84wftgbvMaHyEeMcTO0e6A6R2OyKQIpKvC7fKpMv5vxGrR9S+QXXC2JbhcjJM6IdSqsACEgoZTRD4JGAycEzMnE2tzE=
References: <29...@ryandesign.com>
<BA...@phx.gbl>
Return-Path: users-return-47037-pons32=hotmail.com@subversion.tigris.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2006 21:43:47.0878 (UTC)
FILETIME=[32A56460:01C65055]
On 3/25/06, Res Pons <po...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Having worked for so many major corporations and being a user of
ClearCase,
> this is how I and many of my colleagues have always set up a Repository:
On
> its own dedicated server. It's not a law or mandate; it's just better
> practice.
I think this really depends upon the version control software you're
running, and what else you might be running on the box. Having never
used ClearCase, I can't offer an opinion there. SourceSafe I'd say
definitely needs a dedicated server simply because it's so fragile -
run VSS and IIS on it and nothing more. Even anti-virus caused
problems.
SVN, OTOH, seems to be lightweight and stable enough that it can share
with other server processes, especially if it's all for build/project
management. As long as you've got the disk capacity and throughput.
Maybe my usage scenario just isn't large-scale enough for me to be
having to worry about this stuff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Andy Levy <an...@gmail.com>.
On 3/25/06, Res Pons <po...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Having worked for so many major corporations and being a user of ClearCase,
> this is how I and many of my colleagues have always set up a Repository: On
> its own dedicated server. It's not a law or mandate; it's just better
> practice.
I think this really depends upon the version control software you're
running, and what else you might be running on the box. Having never
used ClearCase, I can't offer an opinion there. SourceSafe I'd say
definitely needs a dedicated server simply because it's so fragile -
run VSS and IIS on it and nothing more. Even anti-virus caused
problems.
SVN, OTOH, seems to be lightweight and stable enough that it can share
with other server processes, especially if it's all for build/project
management. As long as you've got the disk capacity and throughput.
Maybe my usage scenario just isn't large-scale enough for me to be
having to worry about this stuff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>.
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 19:11 +0100, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> > 3. I think it would be more efficient if you ran clean up, maybe
> > just once a week, instead of, every night?
>
> I think you shouldn't have to run svn cleanup ever. It's only ever
> useful if Subversion tells you to run it, and the only reason it
> would tell you that is if something is broken, as in you were using
> svn and it crashed or encountered an unexpected error and left the
> working copy in an inconsistent state. So why is Alex running into
> the need to run svn cleanup so often? That's the problem we should be
> fixing.
Hi,
it never occurs that the repository gets "wedged" on it's own. It's
usually a user interrupting the client by Ctrl-C when updating. It's
also not the case that this occurs very often; but when it does, it
takes soo long to clean up.
Regards,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Res Pons <po...@hotmail.com>.
Having worked for so many major corporations and being a user of ClearCase,
this is how I and many of my colleagues have always set up a Repository: On
its own dedicated server. It's not a law or mandate; it's just better
practice.
It makes it easy to troubleshoot and you don't have make a million guesses
as to what caused a problem as for many many applications you mentioned you
serve from your repo server. Except needing Apache to supervise and
authenticate access, I am very strict with my Subversion Server. However,
some of the applications you mentioned are part of the Linux pckg anyway, so
I don't see any harm but when you got a lot of non-SVN usres logged in to
that server, you maybe slowing down or sacrificing your SVN users,
especially when many users, including myself have posted here as to why SVN
is so slow. I have 10,000 files in one of the projects in my repo and it
takes a full 25-35 minutes to do a complete fresh check out.
----Original Message Follows----
From: Ryan Schmidt <su...@ryandesign.com>
To: Res Pons <po...@hotmail.com>, alex@kiesel.name
CC: Subversion List <us...@subversion.tigris.org>
Subject: Re: svn cleanup performance
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:11:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.3)
Received: from smtprelay02.ispgateway.de ([80.67.18.14]) by
bay0-mc8-f9.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 25
Mar 2006 10:11:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 21756 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2006 18:11:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [213.196.200.225]) (560487@[213.196.200.225])
(envelope-sender <su...@ryandesign.com>) by
smtprelay02.ispgateway.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP
for <us...@subversion.tigris.org>; 25 Mar 2006 18:11:30 -0000
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jEHjJx36Oi8+Z3TmmkSEdPtfpLB7P/ybN8=
References: <BA...@phx.gbl>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.3)
Return-Path: subversion-2006Q1@ryandesign.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2006 18:11:31.0611 (UTC)
FILETIME=[8B3D46B0:01C65037]
On Mar 25, 2006, at 18:35, Res Pons wrote:
>1. A respository should always have its own dedicated server and nothing
>else should be served from that server.
Never heard that before. Granted, it could conceivably improve performance,
but our Subversion repository server also serves MySQL, Apache, PHP,
Postfix, Cyrus, Samba, and probably more that I'm forgetting. Where's the
official statement that a repository server shouldn't do anything else?
>3. I think it would be more efficient if you ran clean up, maybe just once
>a week, instead of, every night?
I think you shouldn't have to run svn cleanup ever. It's only ever useful
if Subversion tells you to run it, and the only reason it would tell you
that is if something is broken, as in you were using svn and it crashed or
encountered an unexpected error and left the working copy in an
inconsistent state. So why is Alex running into the need to run svn cleanup
so often? That's the problem we should be fixing.
_________________________________________________________________
Don�t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Ryan Schmidt <su...@ryandesign.com>.
On Mar 25, 2006, at 18:35, Res Pons wrote:
> 1. A respository should always have its own dedicated server and
> nothing else should be served from that server.
Never heard that before. Granted, it could conceivably improve
performance, but our Subversion repository server also serves MySQL,
Apache, PHP, Postfix, Cyrus, Samba, and probably more that I'm
forgetting. Where's the official statement that a repository server
shouldn't do anything else?
> 3. I think it would be more efficient if you ran clean up, maybe
> just once a week, instead of, every night?
I think you shouldn't have to run svn cleanup ever. It's only ever
useful if Subversion tells you to run it, and the only reason it
would tell you that is if something is broken, as in you were using
svn and it crashed or encountered an unexpected error and left the
working copy in an inconsistent state. So why is Alex running into
the need to run svn cleanup so often? That's the problem we should be
fixing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
RE: svn cleanup performance
Posted by Res Pons <po...@hotmail.com>.
I just wanna make couple of points EVEN IF some of you are already aware of
them:
1. A respository should always have its own dedicated server and nothing
else should be served from that server.
2. Not that the disk space matters, so do the number of files or the *nix
inode limitatios. I don't know the exact number but recently we maxed the
number of files/inodes on a production/live server and surpassed 2.6 million
files and that brought our live server to a screeching halt and I had to
scram and delete about 20% of old outdated stuff to get the server back
online.
3. I think it would be more efficient if you ran clean up, maybe just once a
week, instead of, every night?
----Original Message Follows----
From: Alex Kiesel <al...@kiesel.name>
To: users@subversion.tigris.org
Subject: svn cleanup performance
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 10:51:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from tigris.org ([64.125.133.100]) by bay0-mc5-f7.bay0.hotmail.com
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 25 Mar 2006 01:51:19 -0800
Received: (qmail 17309 invoked by uid 5000); 25 Mar 2006 09:51:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 17287 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2006 09:51:10 -0000
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFHViR/5zStKKmHHAY1XYPyqTcAYjqaZ1k=
Mailing-List: contact users-help@subversion.tigris.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
list-help: <ma...@subversion.tigris.org>
list-unsubscribe: <ma...@subversion.tigris.org>
list-post: <ma...@subversion.tigris.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list users@subversion.tigris.org
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port
Return-Path: users-return-47005-pons32=hotmail.com@subversion.tigris.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2006 09:51:19.0362 (UTC)
FILETIME=[AA8B8220:01C64FF1]
Hi all,
(I've searched the archives but was unable to find an answer or
discussion on this)
we've got an svn repository with ~70000 files and directories. Updating
it on a daily basis takes a long time (so I've put that into a cron).
However, occasionally, errors occur and I have to svn cleanup.
I noticed that `svn cleanup` at the root of the repository takes
_really_ long time (more than 30 minutes) and eats up up to 200 MB of
RAM.
Is there any way to tweak this, to make it faster and/or slimmer (apart
from making sure only to work on smaller sub-trees of the repo)? I
assume this is server-independent; my box is a FreeBSD box, but it also
occurs on various Linux boxes.
Regards,
-Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee�
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org