Folks,
We are seeing frequent need to recover subversion repositories for reasons
that aren't entirely clear. Norman pointed to:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.reposadmin.html#svn.reposadmin.basics.backends
The key item here is that apparently the FSFS "backend" is much less
sensitive to interruptions in connections which can easily leave BerkleyDB
in a state where it needs to be recovered.
I have confirmed that we seem to be using BDB instead of FSFS. Does anyone
see a reason we should use BDB instead of FSFS? Is there someone available
who is competent to transition from BSB to FSFS *cough* hobu *cough*?
This wedging problem is already significant for MapGuide and Mapbender, and
as more projects migrate (OSSIM is in progress I think) this will only be
more important.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
I have confirmed that we seem to be using BDB instead of FSFS. Does anyone
see a reason we should use BDB instead of FSFS?
May be the reason is that FSFS is more killing for server than BDB,
it's code is also called as "less mature" whatever it means.
Here is detailed comparison:
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/notes/fsfs
Is there someone available who is competent to transition
from BSB to FSFS *cough* hobu *cough*?
I'm not competent, but I did such transition 2 times.
It is simple but time consuming because it's like a repository
migration, using dump/create new repo/load.
Here are details:
http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#bdb-fsfs-convert
--
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net
The process of changing backend is simple. As Mateusz says it's a simple
dump and reload. The reason it's in BDB is because of it's maturity and
it's far easier to recover if anything 'bad' happens. Unfortunetly it has
a locking problem if a checkout is interrupted somehow. The 1.4.x
versions of subversion where supposed to fix this locking problem.
If there is consesus on converting to fsfs i can do the conversion.
shawn
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
I have confirmed that we seem to be using BDB instead of FSFS. Does
anyone
see a reason we should use BDB instead of FSFS?
May be the reason is that FSFS is more killing for server than BDB,
it's code is also called as "less mature" whatever it means.
Here is detailed comparison:
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/notes/fsfs
Is there someone available who is competent to transition
from BSB to FSFS *cough* hobu *cough*?
I'm not competent, but I did such transition 2 times.
It is simple but time consuming because it's like a repository
migration, using dump/create new repo/load.
Here are details:
http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#bdb-fsfs-convert
--
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net
_______________________________________________
Sac mailing list
Sac@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
sbarnes@dmsolutions.ca wrote:
The reason it's in BDB is because of it's maturity and
it's far easier to recover if anything 'bad' happens.
Shawn,
Hmm, isn't BDB more sensitive about 'bad' things than FSFS?
This seems to be the conclusion coming from the comparison in SVN book:
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.reposadmin.html#svn.reposadmin.basics.backends
as well as from this FSFS notes [1] :
"Little or no need for recovery" - about FSFS
[1] http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/notes/fsfs
Cheers
--
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net
sbarnes@dmsolutions.ca wrote:
The process of changing backend is simple. As Mateusz says it's a simple
dump and reload. The reason it's in BDB is because of it's maturity and
it's far easier to recover if anything 'bad' happens. Unfortunetly it has
a locking problem if a checkout is interrupted somehow. The 1.4.x
versions of subversion where supposed to fix this locking problem.
If there is consesus on converting to fsfs i can do the conversion.
Shawn,
Perhaps we could switch over Mapbender which seems to have suffered
fairly frequent problems, and see if things are thereafter stable?
Mapbender folks - willing to be a guinea pig?
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
sbarnes@dmsolutions.ca wrote:
The process of changing backend is simple. As Mateusz says it's a simple
dump and reload. The reason it's in BDB is because of it's maturity and
it's far easier to recover if anything 'bad' happens. Unfortunetly it has
a locking problem if a checkout is interrupted somehow. The 1.4.x
versions of subversion where supposed to fix this locking problem.
If there is consesus on converting to fsfs i can do the conversion.
Shawn,
Perhaps we could switch over Mapbender which seems to have suffered
fairly frequent problems, and see if things are thereafter stable?
Mapbender folks - willing to be a guinea pig?
Best regards,
Hello,
Frank Warmerdam asks whether we are happy with them changing SVN from BDB to FSFS. My vote is:
+1 to let them do whatever it takes to get SVN stable.
Ideally you could switch over during your evening hours then we wont even feel anything. Please someone who is subscribed to mapbender_dev notify this list beforehand.
Best regards and thanks for the help,
Arnulf.
Arnulf,
I can do the switch over at anytime. What is the best time for you and
mapbender developers?
shawn
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
sbarnes@dmsolutions.ca wrote:
The process of changing backend is simple. As Mateusz says it's a
simple
dump and reload. The reason it's in BDB is because of it's maturity
and
it's far easier to recover if anything 'bad' happens. Unfortunetly it
has
a locking problem if a checkout is interrupted somehow. The 1.4.x
versions of subversion where supposed to fix this locking problem.
If there is consesus on converting to fsfs i can do the conversion.
Shawn,
Perhaps we could switch over Mapbender which seems to have suffered
fairly frequent problems, and see if things are thereafter stable?
Mapbender folks - willing to be a guinea pig?
Best regards,
Hello,
Frank Warmerdam asks whether we are happy with them changing SVN from BDB
to FSFS. My vote is:
+1 to let them do whatever it takes to get SVN stable.
Ideally you could switch over during your evening hours then we wont even
feel anything. Please someone who is subscribed to mapbender_dev notify
this list beforehand.
Best regards and thanks for the help,
Arnulf.
_______________________________________________
Sac mailing list
Sac@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
sbarnes@dmsolutions.ca wrote:
Arnulf,
I can do the switch over at anytime. What is the best time for you and
mapbender developers?
shawn
Shawn,
we have a 24h maintenance slot caused by our ISP provider as of this Friday 4pm local time[1]. From then on throughout the weekend would be fine. I will send a message to dev that SVN will be back up as of Monday morning local time[2], that should give you all the time that you need.
If this does not work for you, no problem, just let me know.
Thanks a lot and best regards, Arnulf.
[1]
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=2&day=9&year=2007&hour=16&min=0&sec=0&p1=37
[2]
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=2&day=12&year=2007&hour=8&min=0&sec=0&p1=37
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
sbarnes@dmsolutions.ca wrote:
The process of changing backend is simple. As Mateusz says it's a
simple
dump and reload. The reason it's in BDB is because of it's maturity
and
it's far easier to recover if anything 'bad' happens. Unfortunetly it
has
a locking problem if a checkout is interrupted somehow. The 1.4.x
versions of subversion where supposed to fix this locking problem.
If there is consesus on converting to fsfs i can do the conversion.
Shawn,
Perhaps we could switch over Mapbender which seems to have suffered
fairly frequent problems, and see if things are thereafter stable?
Mapbender folks - willing to be a guinea pig?
Best regards,
Hello,
Frank Warmerdam asks whether we are happy with them changing SVN from BDB
to FSFS. My vote is:
+1 to let them do whatever it takes to get SVN stable.
Ideally you could switch over during your evening hours then we wont even
feel anything. Please someone who is subscribed to mapbender_dev notify
this list beforehand.
Best regards and thanks for the help,
Arnulf.
_______________________________________________
Sac mailing list
Sac@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
_______________________________________________
Sac mailing list
Sac@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac