On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 08:00 +0200, Markus Schaber wrote: > Hi, Loren, > > Did you try "svnadmin pack" on the repositories?
svnadmin pack is a new feature of 1.6.x. As I stated in my email, I am using 1.5.x. Would pack reduce space on a freshly loaded repository? I'd assume it would pack it tightly on a load operation. > > Best regards > > Markus Schaber > > ___________________________ > We software Automation. > > 3S-Smart Software Solutions GmbH > Markus Schaber | Developer > Memminger Str. 151 | 87439 Kempten | Germany | Tel. +49-831-54031-0 | Fax > +49-831-54031-50 > > Email: m.scha...@3s-software.com | Web: http://www.3s-software.com > CoDeSys internet forum: http://forum.3s-software.com > Download CoDeSys sample projects: > http://www.3s-software.com/index.shtml?sample_projects > > Managing Directors: Dipl.Inf. Dieter Hess, Dipl.Inf. Manfred Werner | Trade > register: Kempten HRB 6186 | Tax ID No.: DE 167014915 > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Loren M. Lang [mailto:lor...@north-winds.org] > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Mai 2011 02:40 > > An: users@subversion.apache.org > > Betreff: Size of Subversion repository > > > > We have been using Subversion 1.4.x for quite some time and just earlier > > this year, we upgraded to 1.5.x. Our repository is still the same as we > > did no dump/load between upgrades. I was curious to see what kind of > > space savings we might have if we did. Our original repository is fsfs > > and was created under 1.4.x as far as I remember. The format file says > > 3 so I might have made it with 1.3.x. The format for the new repo is 5. > > Here are the numbers for two tests I did, one with fsfs and one with bdb. > > > > 737M svn-original > > 690M svn-fsfs > > 903M svn-bdb > > 2.3G total > > > > Are these numbers typical? And why is BDB so significantly larger? Is > > there any real benefit to it nowadays? Our server set-up is all access > > must be through the apache user via mod_dav_svn. >
