bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Martin <>
Subject Re: [Apache Bloodhound] #156: Local copy of bloodhound part of Apache repo for browse functionality
Date Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:36:51 GMT
Hi everyone,

I should work out how to test this suggestion but I would expect it to 
work. I got Bloodhound set up with the postgresql backend so that aspect 
should be fine (I seem to remember reading about problems when using 
sqlite). After that, I assume that we can work with everything as 
read-only from bloodhound's point of view.

So, as long as subversion can also play nicely with NFS then I have no 
current reason to suspect problems with this approach at this point.


On 08/08/12 22:26, Greg Stein wrote:
> Very cool!
> But with that said... I was on IRC, and the Infra guys might actually
> create a full repository mirror for us. The thing is that Apache
> Allura (also incubating) will want a copy of their project(s), too.
> Tho... I think they're going with Git, but the concept is the same.
> Bloodhound and Allura both need local read-access to repositories.
> Infra was thinking about sync'ing repository copies over to a box (I
> forget the name). The BH and Allura VMs would be migrated over to that
> same box. The repositories would then be exposed via NFS, and the two
> VMs would (locally) mount that NFS share.
> I believe the Right Answer here is for both projects to confirm that
> this option is workable, and for us to ask Infra to start setting it
> up.
> Thoughts?
> Cheers,
> -g
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Gary Martin <> wrote:
>> Not sure if this could be of interest beyond Bloodhound. It is a very simple
>> script (and quite possibly over-complicated in reality).
>> The attachment referred to is here:
>> Just tested it on 1229640 empty commits:
>>     python3 1229640 | eatmydata svnadmin
>>     --bypass-prop-validation load repos/
>> which took about 2 hours - I suspect that the svnadmin load was the real
>> bottleneck.. it is just a few seconds to create about 92M of data if you
>> direct to a file instead.
>> Cheers,
>>      Gary
>> On 08/07/2012 06:47 PM, Apache Bloodhound wrote:
>>> #156: Local copy of bloodhound part of Apache repo for browse
>>> functionality
>>> ------------------------+-----------------------
>>>     Reporter:  gjm        |      Owner:  nobody
>>>         Type:  task       |     Status:  new
>>>     Priority:  critical   |  Milestone:  Release 2
>>>    Component:  siteadmin  |    Version:
>>> Resolution:             |   Keywords:
>>> ------------------------+-----------------------
>>> Comment (by gjm):
>>>    As part of my investigation around creating a mirror of the bloodhound
>>>    portion, I have written a very simple script (only complicated when I
>>>    decided to have a quick look at the argparse module and python2/3
>>> issues),
>>>    inspired by a suggestion from Philip Martin.
>>>    I have attached that script [ here]. It may be
>>>    worth putting in the bloodhound repository in case we need it again of
>>>    course.

View raw message