Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:55:05 -0500 From: "John Mehr" <jcm@visi.com> To: <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn - but smaller? Message-ID: <web-11318704@mailback3.g2host.com> In-Reply-To: <514E7927.2010901@gmail.com> References: <web-11636850@mailback4.g2host.com> <513E2DA5.70200@mac.com> <web-12282796@mailback4.g2host.com> <op.wts7cnaeg7njmm@michael-think> <web-11149903@mailback3.g2host.com> <dd47b0701af3e2b6c92fe70fa0da3fc1.squirrel@webmail.ee.ryerson.ca> <web-11167614@mailback3.g2host.com> <514E7927.2010901@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 05:55:19 +0200 Markiyan Kushnir <markiyan.kushnir@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello John, > > Tested svnup for a while, and I can say it does its job >well, and works basically as I would expect, so thanks >for your initiative. Although it appears to be quite >resource greedy. Most of the time it showed something >like: > > PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C > TIME WCPU COMMAND > 22270 mkushnir 1 102 0 44944K 31804K CPU0 1 > 6:22 97.56% a.out > > > I looked at the source code, and found that it uses svn >commands that are known as the "main command set". The >program is implemented around get-dir and get-file. I >think there is significant room for resource and >performance improvement. > > Have you considered an approach to use what svn folks >call the editor command set? I mean acting as a trivial >svn client: we might ask the server to drive our checking >out or updating. The server will be telling us only >diffs. Checking out a full tree would be just another >diff, although bigger than usually. We would also benefit >from compression on the wire. > > Another advantage would be to always have consistent >repo more-or-less guaranteed by the svn server. > > I've done some proof of concept recently, and the >results look encouraging to me. For example, a do-nothing >update really does nothing. A two-or-three revisions >update takes a couple of seconds. And a full checkout of >the base/stable/9 takes ~7m30s at 530kB/s to me. Hello, The results I was getting from testing out the svn protocol's editor command set were unpleasant enough to put it into the "come back to this later" category while I worked on implementing the http/https side. The good news it that the http side is *much* easier to work with in this respect and getting a report with filenames and MD5/SHA-1 signatures for all of the files in the repository can be obtained all at once. I should have a new and improved version ready to go this weekend or early next week at the latest.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?web-11318704>