subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Georgeson <>
Subject RE: corrupt revision, "Reading one svndiff window read beyond the end of the representation"
Date Tue, 03 Aug 2010 15:03:21 GMT
Regarding reproducibility, that's what I was going for with #3. I found another thread,,
concluding this error is due to fsfsverify not being current with the latest format, so I'll
give the svndump to new repo and redo revision in new repo a try.

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Shahaf [] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 9:30 AM
To: Justin Georgeson
Subject: Re: corrupt revision, "Reading one svndiff window read beyond the end of the representation"

Justin Georgeson wrote on Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 17:39:49 -0500:
> I have a repo with >39k revisions. Last week, r39245 was committed, a merge of a single
file from trunk to branch. It is the HEAD revision of that file on that branch. Turns out
this revision is corrupt
> [svnadmin@hourdcm3 ~]$ svnadmin verify -r 39245 /repos/prowess
> svnadmin: Reading one svndiff window read beyond the end of the representation

Is this reproducible?  i.e., if you re-commit r39245 (on top of, say, an
svnsync/backup repository at r39244), does it become corrupted again?

> I've searched from r30000 to HEAD in this repo and that's the only rev that fails the
verify. All our backup copies have the same issue too. I'm wondering what our options for
recovery are. Some suggestions we have come up with internally are:
> 1. Developer still has sandbox which reports the parent folder as updated, so have him
'svn cat' the previous version and commit that, then re-commit the changes from the corrupt
> 2. 'svn rm' the file from the server and re-add it (losing ancestry)
> 3. Some combination of svndump up to that revision, import to new repo, redo that merge
in new repo, overwrite the revision file with new one
> 4. delete revision file (seems like bad idea)
> 5. svn dump up to corrupt revision and everything after bad revision, merge dumps, create
new repo, redo merge

Don't do #4.

#5 sounds reasonable.  You have to restitch history in some way now.

> Is there something else we missed? Which of these seems like the safest/easiest?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information
for the sole use of the intended recipient.  Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure
by others is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to
receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail
and delete all copies of this message.

View raw message