On 6 April 2014 18:31, Stefan Fuhrmann <stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote: >> >> On 31 January 2014 14:57, Ivan Zhakov <i...@visualsvn.com> wrote: >> > On 31 January 2014 05:50, Evgeny Kotkov <evgeny.kot...@visualsvn.com> >> > wrote: >> >>> This only affects non-sharded repositories with rev-local IDs, >> >>> i.e. those in SVN 1.4 format. For those, it is writing 3 files >> >>> instead of 2 per rev now. >> >> >> >> I assume you are talking about r1560723 [1]. If I read the code >> >> correctly... >> >> [[[ >> >> if ( (!max_files_per_dir || rev % max_files_per_dir == 0) >> >> && dst_ffd->format >= SVN_FS_FS__MIN_NO_GLOBAL_IDS_FORMAT) >> >> SVN_ERR(hotcopy_update_current(&dst_youngest, dst_fs, rev, >> >> iterpool)); >> >> ]]] >> >> >> >> ...hotcopy now checkpoints after every revision for all non-sharded >> >> repositories >> >> with FSFS format >= 3. So, checkpointing happens for all FSFS format >> >> 1/2 >> >> repositories upgraded via 'svnadmin upgrade' (with linear layout), that >> >> were >> >> not fsfs-reshard'ed or dump/loaded into a repository with newer format. >> >> >> >> I am not aware of how many people reshard or dump/load their old >> >> repositories >> >> after upgrade, but I did a quick benchmark for a real-world repository >> >> and on my >> >> machine it shows 7x performance degradation with checkpointing enabled. >> >> Is it >> >> worth the ability to re-run the backup from a checkpoint upon >> >> cancellation? >> >> >> >> [[[ >> >> # svnrdump http://googletest.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ >> >> # load the dump into a --compatible-version=1.3 repository >> >> # upgrade the repository with the most recent svnadmin >> >> >> >> # disable checkpointing, benchmark making 100 hotcopy backups: >> >> real 0m18.741s >> >> user 0m2.552s >> >> sys 0m13.432s >> >> >> >> # now enable checkpointing and repeat the benchmark: >> >> real 2m5.793s >> >> user 0m0.836s >> >> sys 0m34.840s >> >> ]]] >> >> >> >> [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=r1560723 >> >> >> > That's what I suspected. In this case I think r1560723 should not be >> > backported to 1.8.x for the following reasons: >> > 1. Significant performance degradation for 'svnadmin hotcopy' with >> > '--incremental' flag. >> > 2. The change doesn't fix original circular dependency problem in FSFS >> > 3. 'svnadmin recover' writes fake value to CURRENT file which very bad >> > practice IMHO and could lead undefined consequences. >> > >> Hi Stefan, >> >> Is this problem fixed or it's better to revert r1560723 for reasons I >> stated above? > > > Hi Ivan, > > Evgeny applied his patch a month ago as r1573744. > Hi Stefan,
Yes, I know. But svnadmin hotcopy performance regression was not fixed as far I know. -- Ivan Zhakov CTO | VisualSVN | http://www.visualsvn.com
