On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 07:17:32PM -0500, Alec Berryman wrote:
> 
> No.  Perhaps I should have been more clear - yes, you've lost a lot if
> you're using BDB, but if you're using FSFS you're only losing one
> commit.  FSFS uses a file to represent each revision.  Yes, that will

Oof.  Tens of thousands of files, times one filesystem fragment per
revision (many of our files have hundreds of revisions by now).  I can see
where _that's_ heading (and it's sure not pretty) The BDB backend made our
repository four times as big -- it sounds like FSFS would be much, much
worse.

I will repeat my question of some months ago: can anyone actually give an
example of a repository with anywhere near as many files and revisions as
ours, with a couple of hundred active developers who semi-regularly
check in, and well over 100 simultaneous checkouts at peak periods, that
is managed by Subversion?

Thor