> On Sep 22, 2010, at 07:54, Stewart Dean wrote:
> > On 9/21/2010 5:23 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> >> In MacPorts, we successfully use the following configure
> argument:
> >>
> >> --with-berkeley-
> db=:${prefix}/include/db46:${prefix}/lib/db46:db-4.6
> >>
> >> So, adapted to your BDB version and prefix, try:
> >>
> >> --with-berkeley-
> db=:/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.5.1/include:/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.5.1/lib
> :db-5.1
> > I did that I think, but
> >> Note that apr-util will also need to have been compiled against
> the same version of BDB.
> > I think I used a packaged apr-util, so I'll download it and build
> it from scratch
> >> That said, do you even need BDB support? Most people don't
> anymore and you could just use --without-berkeley-db to disable it.
> > But don't you then end up with a flat file DB that's slow with
> any substantial data set size?
>
>
> Remember to Reply All so your reply goes to the list too, not just
> to me.
>
> If you don't use BerkeleyDB, you get a so-called "FSFS" repository.
> FSFS is a file-based database, just like BerkeleyDB is, but has
> been designed specifically for Subversion. FSFS has been the
> default for new repositories for years (since Subversion 1.2) and
> works great. It's what most people use for Subversion today. It is
> not a problem. BerkeleyDB, on the other hand, is usually several
> problems, which is why the Subversion developers have spent so much
> effort over the years creating and improving FSFS. I am told BDB
> has its place but I recommend it be avoided.
>
Although, I think they are starting to migrate more of the metadata in the
server to sqlite. Everything old is new again eh.
BOb
