comparission between fsfs and bdb subversion backands

[Radoslaw Stachowiak <rs...@gmail.com>]

Could someone provide some real world numbers on medium( or large)
size repository performance which compares fsfs and bdb backends ?

as for now i see this differences:
fsfs+ no write access needed for anonymous readonly access (bdb requires it)
fsfs+ no berkleydb dependency
fsfs- new, not extensively tested

i'm interested in:
1) performance info
2) repository size (for medium..large repositories)
3) speed differences 


-- 
radoslaw.

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

Re: comparission between fsfs and bdb subversion backands

["C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>]

"C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net> writes:

> Well, we can probably temper that one with:
> 
>   fsfs+ written by a friggin' genius.

Oops.  I forgot -- it's better than that.

    fsfs+ written by *two* friggin' geniuses!

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

Re: comparission between fsfs and bdb subversion backands

["C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>]

Radoslaw Stachowiak <rs...@gmail.com> writes:

> fsfs- new, not extensively tested

Well, we can probably temper that one with:

  fsfs+ written by a friggin' genius.

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

Re: comparission between fsfs and bdb subversion backands

[Alan Knowles <al...@akbkhome.com>]

Radoslaw Stachowiak wrote:

>Could someone provide some real world numbers on medium( or large)
>size repository performance which compares fsfs and bdb backends ?
>
>as for now i see this differences:
>fsfs+ no write access needed for anonymous readonly access (bdb requires it)
>fsfs+ no berkleydb dependency
>fsfs- new, not extensively tested
>
>i'm interested in:
>1) performance info
>  
>
Seems fine - I have a 36K+ repository over webdav, and it appears no 
slower than dbd used to be with a smaller repository.

>2) repository size (for medium..large repositories)
>  
>
I've checked out (cvs.php.net/pear) into my repo - prefectly ok.

>3) speed differences 
>  
>
appears to be the same as bdb

4) Reliability
In my view, 1000x better than bdb -  no corrupt databases since I 
installed it (very common before that)

The only downside is that backups via nfs is problematic due to the no. 
of files in the data dir.

Regards
Alan


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