thank you all for your feedback. I've incorporated your comments.
It would really be bad to prefer SVN as the VCS in a book, but writing
counterproductive or misleading things, so I'm really glad that you've
helped.
If someone is interested in seeing that printed, the book is "Agile
ALM", and will be printed in May (Manning).
Regards
Michael
Am Freitag, den 22.04.2011, 10:13 +0200 schrieb
kmra...@rockwellcollins.com:
Bob Archer wrote on 04/22/2011 09:39:03 AM:
>
> > in most cases, you don't want to host a SVN repository on
Windows.
>
> Why? We are a windows "shop" and we have windows servers and we
host
> on windows. I've seen zero problems. I think this type of anti-ms
> FUD is going to be bad for svn if it is widely said and published.
One big reason is that 64-bit apache is not as mainstream on Windows.
There are open source builds, and there is now a 64-bit mod_dav_svn
available on Windows, but neither collabnet or wandisco say more
than "coming soon".
I regularly see Apache use >8GB of RAM on one of our 64-bit
windows servers during some large repo transactions. This is
not just cache usage. When it was running under a 32-bit
apache it just kept hard crashing apache when it hit 2GB
of RAM usage, which disconnects all user sessions. Not nice...
That being said, once moving to a 64-bit apache on windows
things have been much more stable. Our unix servers (on the
same caliber of hardware) are handling a lot more load than
windows, but I don't have any specific performance stats
to prove that windows is the limiting factor.
Kevin R.
