On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen < dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 Jun 2010, at 17:45, Philip Martin wrote: > > > Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen <dan...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> The bug is somewhat subtle, and the circumstances causing it are > >> fairly complex. In the cause of running a test suite, we open > >> repositories repeatedly using the ‘file’ protocol, log their history > >> and fetch the contents of all revisions. This will fail after about > >> a hundred tests, having exhausted file descriptors. Inspecting the > >> output of ‘lsof’ on the process, there are 216 open references to > >> ‘rep-cache.db’ files. > > > > Issue 3506 has changed the way the rep-cache is written: > > > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3506 > > > > The changes are not in 1.6 yet: > > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/1.6.x-issue3506/ > > I just switched my checkout to that branch, compiled and ran the tests. And > it worked! Great! > > Is there any particular reason why it hasn't been merged into the 1.6.x > branch yet? > It just needs one more vote, as per STATUS: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/branches/1.6.x/STATUS Lobbying here or on IRC for that vote will improve it's chances of being cast. (But I suspect that it will happen before we get to 1.6.12.) > > If converting a repository is a bit like "svnadmin dump" then it may > > not be SWIG, you might be seeing issue 3593: > > > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3593 > > That's interesting. I'm currently doing a dump-and-load of the cvs2svn > repository. (For some reason, this is obnoxiously slow…) I'll give it a try > once it completes and report back. > > For what it's worth, we also get massive leaks with the SWIG bindings when > cloning/converting over the network. I'm sure this isn't the only cause of > those leaks :) > :( For which flavor of the swig bindings are you seeing problems? -Hyrum
