Re: Recommendations for a production svn server

[kf...@collab.net]

Folker Schamel <sc...@spinor.com> writes:
> I don't know about 0.31.1 with 0.35.1,
> but generally we had major troubles when mixing server/client versions
> (hangs during updates; costed us a lot of time before
> we found out the reason).
> Because of this, we STRICTLY follow the policy to always
> use EXACTLY the same version for server and client.

Our policy (pre-1.0) is that client/server compatibility is always
maintained across one minor version number.  For example, 0.34 is
compatible with 0.35.*, no matter which is client and which is server.

(Sometimes the compatibility spreads further than this, but one is the
minimum we guarantee.)

So, Folker Schamel's policy is probably overly strict, though it's
certainly safe :-).  Folker, if you had compatibility problems between
two versions that were only one minor version apart, please let us
know.  That's a problem.

After 1.0, we will be more conservative of course.

-Karl

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

Re: Recommendations for a production svn server

[Folker Schamel <sc...@spinor.com>]

>> However, I think if some older versions really had
>>compatibility problems, who cares?
> 
> 
> Ah.  Oh well; if you ever happen to remember or dig up those old
> emails, post them, but otherwise, we'll just have to not worry about
> this one.

We never wrote emails about this; due to important pending
work, we had to solve this problem as quick as possible,
finally get it working "somehow", but hadn't time to really
investigate the problem systematically.

I would say, forget about it
(maybe I should not have mentioned it...)

Normally, I would NEVER say "forget about this problem",
because it may hide a bug until it causes serious harm
some day. But in this case compatibility problems
naturally don't inherit into newer versions,
so I think it is fine to forget about it
IN THIS SPECIAL CASE.


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

Re: Recommendations for a production svn server

[kf...@collab.net]

Folker Schamel <sc...@spinor.com> writes:
> I know the following comments are not very helpful,
> but I THINK there were problems with one one minor version number
> difference: The reason that I think so is that I know this rule
> now for a longer time, and I think that we didn't violate it,
> but still had this problem.
> However, I am not absolutely sure (maybe there were a difference
> of two instead of one), and it would cost a lot of time for
> us to try reproduce it (a svn dump / import needs all in all
> about around 10 hours or so; the hang we had occurred if
> one team member of us checked out from home, whcih run fine
> for about one hour, and than hanging without server and client
> activity anymore; upgrading and matching the svn-version
> solved the problem).
> 
> However, I think if some older versions really had
> compatibility problems, who cares?

Ah.  Oh well; if you ever happen to remember or dig up those old
emails, post them, but otherwise, we'll just have to not worry about
this one.

Thanks,
-Karl

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

Re: Recommendations for a production svn server

[Folker Schamel <sc...@spinor.com>]

kfogel@collab.net wrote:

> (Sometimes the compatibility spreads further than this, but one is the
> minimum we guarantee.)
> 
> So, Folker Schamel's policy is probably overly strict, though it's
> certainly safe :-).  Folker, if you had compatibility problems between
> two versions that were only one minor version apart, please let us
> know.  That's a problem.

I know the following comments are not very helpful,
but I THINK there were problems with one one minor version number
difference: The reason that I think so is that I know this rule
now for a longer time, and I think that we didn't violate it,
but still had this problem.
However, I am not absolutely sure (maybe there were a difference
of two instead of one), and it would cost a lot of time for
us to try reproduce it (a svn dump / import needs all in all
about around 10 hours or so; the hang we had occurred if
one team member of us checked out from home, whcih run fine
for about one hour, and than hanging without server and client
activity anymore; upgrading and matching the svn-version
solved the problem).

However, I think if some older versions really had
compatibility problems, who cares?

Cheers,
Folker



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

Re: Recommendations for a production svn server

[Glen <gl...@model3.net>]

Thanks everyone for the recommendations and answers....  I was mildly 
concerned about being responsible for the subversion server (and knowing 
nothing about apache or subversion) but after monitoring this mailing 
list for a few days and the responses to my question that is a concern 
no more.

We have windows 2003 server with apache 2.0.48 and svn 0.35.1 up and 
running (I just got mod_ssl and mod_deflate working too yahoo!!!).  We 
have 9 projects (500 megs) and have one project (10 megs) in subversion 
and will move the rest over as everyone in the company gets over their 
learning curve.  I just set up 2 mirrored 10K ide raptor drives for the 
repositories (among other things), actually the server power supply died 
so I took the down-time to add the raided drives :-D.  We use ant 
scripts for 80% of our commits and updates so there is no changes needed 
for many developer's once the ant scripts are changed over.  The other 
10% will use a combo of command line, tortoise and subclipse (once there 
is a version compatible with 0.35.1 out)

thanks again for all the assistance :-)
Glen



kfogel@collab.net wrote:

>Folker Schamel <sc...@spinor.com> writes:
>  
>
>>I don't know about 0.31.1 with 0.35.1,
>>but generally we had major troubles when mixing server/client versions
>>(hangs during updates; costed us a lot of time before
>>we found out the reason).
>>Because of this, we STRICTLY follow the policy to always
>>use EXACTLY the same version for server and client.
>>    
>>
>
>Our policy (pre-1.0) is that client/server compatibility is always
>maintained across one minor version number.  For example, 0.34 is
>compatible with 0.35.*, no matter which is client and which is server.
>
>(Sometimes the compatibility spreads further than this, but one is the
>minimum we guarantee.)
>
>So, Folker Schamel's policy is probably overly strict, though it's
>certainly safe :-).  Folker, if you had compatibility problems between
>two versions that were only one minor version apart, please let us
>know.  That's a problem.
>
>After 1.0, we will be more conservative of course.
>
>-Karl
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>  
>