Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 12:51:20 +0300 From: Markiyan Kushnir <markiyan.kushnir@gmail.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn - but smaller? Message-ID: <51580718.1010501@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <web-11318704@mailback3.g2host.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> <web-11318704@mailback3.g2host.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25.03.2013 02:55, John Mehr wrote: > > > > 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. Hi again! Yes, I agree that svn editor needs quite a bit of effort. I was actually encouraged to break this challenge, and made my own svnup based on svndiff. If you are interested in details, you may find it on github.com under mkushnir/mrksvnup. It's a complete app, although you may use or re-use (parts of) it if you want. I also tested your svnup more and found that it doesn't handle symbolic links well. (May be you have already been aware of it.) I would suggest to test svnup against official svn client. Here is briefly what I'm doing to test my own svnup: # svn co -r NNNNNN svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head head.svn # svnup -u svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head -r NNNNNN -l head.svnup # diff -r head.svnup/ head.svn | egrep -v 'FreeBSD|\-\-\-|^diff \-r|^[0-9]+c[0-9]+' The diff output must be clean. -- Markiyan. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51580718.1010501>