> We are not going to fix any speed issues in 1.5.

Yes, I understand that. My hope was that it's not a direct SVN issue, but some 
problem of incorrect linking libraries or the like.

> 
> That said, why are you so sure you must use exactly 1.4?  Subversion 1.7
> can create, read, and write 1.4 repositories.  And there have been
> significant performance improvements in the past four years...

I just have my own project based on the code of SVN 1.4 and porting to 1.7 may 
take considerable efforts. I post this message just in a hope that somebody 
could have any ideas why slowdown started to appear on a new version of linux 
distribution. 

Vyacheslav

> 
> 
> Vyacheslav Zholudev wrote on Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 23:29:09 +0100:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> After transition from debian lenny to squeeze I recompiled my version of SVN 
>> 1.4 (yes, I do need exactly 1.4). I tried to load a dump with many 1 file 
>> revisions into the BDB-based repository. 
>> First 300 revisions are committed really fast, like 10 revisions per second. 
>> After 1000 revisions, it is about 1-2 seconds per one revision. And 
>> performance keeps degrading.
>> 
>> I'm curious what that might be? I tried to compile against different 
>> versions of APR (from 1.3 to 1.5) with BDB 4.8. I used libtool 1.5 since 
>> autogen.sh does not work with libtool 2.2. May this be somehow related to my 
>> issue? Maybe some compilations flags are wrong for a new system, or some 
>> libraries that I'm linking against (e.g. neon)?
>> 
>> I have no real clue what that might be, so I will highly appreciate if 
>> somebody can give me any pointers, even vague ones or possible hints to try, 
>> since I really need SVN 1.4 for my other projects.
>> 
>> P.S. CPU usage is very high, waiting for IO was about high (that what I 
>> would expect) and decreases to 0% over the time. 
>> P.P.S. I also tried to compile in maintainer mode and without, with 
>> preinstalled APR, and by putting them into source tree, with mod_dav and 
>> without. Still the same...
>> 
>> Thanks a lot in advance,
>> Vyacheslav
>> 
>> 

Best,
Vyacheslav



Reply via email to