Re: svn wc&repo performance

2011-08-09 Thread Andreas Krey
On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:12:17 +, Stefan Sperling wrote: ... > export SVN_I_LOVE_CORRUPTED_WORKING_COPIES_SO_DISABLE_SLEEP_FOR_TIMESTAMPS=1 ITYM "...AMPS=yes". Then it's running faster (and not apparently corrupt) indeed, and we're now closing up to git. I'd like SVN_DO_CONTENT_CHECK_ON_EQUAL_T

Re: svn wc&repo performance

2011-08-09 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 11:46:06AM +0200, Erik Huelsmann wrote: > The fact that the 'svn up' takes about a second can't be blamed on SQL Lite > or any other SQL engine. The Subversion client sleeps 1 second to make sure > that it's able to detect changes to files: it does timestamp checks and > ret

Re: svn wc&repo performance

2011-08-09 Thread Andreas Krey
On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:38:41 +, Stefan Sperling wrote: ... > Which script are you referring to? Can you post it or provide a link? This one: set -xe rm -rf repo wc time svnadmin create repo time svn checkout file:///`pwd`/repo wc cd wc mkdir D touch A D/B D/C E # svn add . # <- That nuisance

Re: svn wc&repo performance

2011-08-09 Thread Erik Huelsmann
Hi Andreas, On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Andreas Krey wrote: > On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 07:39:59 +, Les Mikesell wrote: > ... > > SQLlite has years of development and a good reputation for robust > behavior. > > I don't doubt that. > > > I'd expect it to be hard to match its performance and r

Re: svn wc&repo performance

2011-08-09 Thread Stefan Sperling
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 11:06:43AM +0200, Andreas Krey wrote: > But I may be barking up the wrong tree. I built svn 1.7 and ran my > small 'second consecutive commit fails' test script with that. It's > not the local operations, but those that act on the repository (here: > file:///...) that take r