On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 4:47 AM, Attila Nagy <bra@fsn.hu> wrote:
On 10/26/11 15:37, Philip Martin wrote:
Attila Nagy <bra@fsn.hu> writes:

I'm trying to update a working copy of some tens of GBs with svn 1.7.1
Did you upgrade with 1.7.0 or 1.7.1?
I've upgraded the WC with 1.7.0, then switched to 1.7.1, which I'm currently using.
The upgrade took nearly one week (I can't afford a clean checkout, because I have to preserve the files' inode numbers), at the start it was running very fast, and at the end of the week it could print a new directory in every 8-10 seconds, while the svn processes CPU usage was 100%.
The disks weren't touched, it seems that even with a database completely in the OS's buffer cache the SQL operations are pretty slow with a lot of files.
Could it be because some indexes are missing (or not optimized for this amount of files), or it is what we could get from SQLite?

I can see where having all that RAM could help greatly when the database is being read, but I do not see how it would help when we are writing to the database.  I would imagine the database does stuff to flush itself to disk whenever a transaction is committed.  I thought this was why we see 1.7 slower than other versions via NFS, even on small working copies where the database would fit in anyones RAM.

I would imagine svn upgrade is almost entirely writes and I recall it does quite a few transactions.  So couldn't the linear slow down just be based on the growth in the amount of bytes that are written to disk each time?

--
Thanks

Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/