> Now that is interesting. 40k doesn't seem to be such a large amount of data
> for modern computers. Very slow and fragmented hard drive? Or perhaps there's
> something else going on that is manifesting this way?
The HDD is indeed on the slowside, and together with low memory...
But I think t
> Now that is interesting. 40k doesn't seem to be such a large amount of data
> for modern computers. Very slow and fragmented hard drive? Or perhaps there's
> something else going on that is manifesting this way?
The HDD is indeed on the slowside, and together with low memory...
But I think t
> Now that is interesting. 40k doesn't seem to be such a large amount of data
> for modern computers. Very slow and fragmented hard drive? Or perhaps there's
> something else going on that is manifesting this way?
The HDD is indeed on the slowside, and together with low memory...
But I think t
10 minutes.
Also, I am quite surprised at the performance penalty when using a HDD at this
stage. Any way to tweak this for low memory servers?
On 21 February 2018 at 16:27, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
> Yo
10 minutes.
Also, I am quite surprised at the performance penalty when using a HDD at this
stage. Any way to tweak this for low memory servers?
On 21 February 2018 at 16:27, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
> Yo
10 minutes.
Also, I am quite surprised at the performance penalty when using a HDD at this
stage. Any way to tweak this for low memory servers?
On 21 February 2018 at 16:27, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
> Yo
018 at 23:11, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
>> Are you running Linux or Windows? Is the disk local or networked?
>
> Server is Debian 9.3. Disk is mounted through fstab with options
> noatime,nodiratime,dat
018 at 23:11, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
>> Are you running Linux or Windows? Is the disk local or networked?
>
> Server is Debian 9.3. Disk is mounted through fstab with options
> noatime,nodiratime,dat
018 at 23:11, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
>> Are you running Linux or Windows? Is the disk local or networked?
>
> Server is Debian 9.3. Disk is mounted through fstab with options
> noatime,nodiratime,dat
thermore, that mount is only
given access to dav_svn in apache2 config.
On 20 February 2018 at 19:14, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
>> Do you see the DELETE in the log after the failed MERGE? Was there an
thermore, that mount is only
given access to dav_svn in apache2 config.
On 20 February 2018 at 19:14, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
>> Do you see the DELETE in the log after the failed MERGE? Was there an
thermore, that mount is only
given access to dav_svn in apache2 config.
On 20 February 2018 at 19:14, Philip Martin
mailto:phi...@codematters.co.uk>> wrote:
Davor Josipovic mailto:dav...@live.com>> writes:
>> Do you see the DELETE in the log after the failed MERGE? Was there an
> Do you see the DELETE in the log after the failed MERGE? Was there an
> error?
The apache2 log I posted is the whole log for that day as far as I recall.
There was nothing else. You see the DELETE error before the MERGE error. I
think that is due to a timing issue. In my previous tries (there
> Do you see the DELETE in the log after the failed MERGE? Was there an
> error?
The apache2 log I posted is the whole log for that day as far as I recall.
There was nothing else. You see the DELETE error before the MERGE error. I
think that is due to a timing issue. In my previous tries (there
> Do you see the DELETE in the log after the failed MERGE? Was there an
> error?
The apache2 log I posted is the whole log for that day as far as I recall.
There was nothing else. You see the DELETE error before the MERGE error. I
think that is due to a timing issue. In my previous tries (there
---
On 18 February 2018 at 20:39, Johan Corveleyn
mailto:jcor...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Davor Josipovic
mailto:dav...@live.com>> wrote:
> It seems to me there is a bug in libapache2-mod-sv
---
On 18 February 2018 at 20:39, Johan Corveleyn
mailto:jcor...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Davor Josipovic
mailto:dav...@live.com>> wrote:
> It seems to me there is a bug in libapache2-mod-sv
It seems to me there is a bug in libapache2-mod-svn/stable,stable,now
1.9.5-1+deb9u1 amd64 [installed].
I described it
here:https://superuser.com/questions/1293699/svn-error-occurred-while-committing-the-transaction
I assume this is the correct place to report?
I concerns the error 160014 "Ref
18 matches
Mail list logo
