[fossil-users] Grouping wiki changes in the timeline

2012-12-21 Thread Marc Simpson
Small feature request (or RfD): It would be neat if adjacent Wiki changes were grouped so that instead of seeing a sequence like: timestamp [artifact id] Changes to wiki page [Foo] (user: marc) timestamp [artifact id] Changes to wiki page [Foo] (user: marc) timestamp [artifact id] Changes

[fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Stefan Bellon
Hi! Previously I haven't used Fossil for very large repositories. But I like its concept and I am thinking about migrating our 15 years of history in four parallel Subversion repositories into one Fossil repository. I wrote a script to replay the commits from Subversion (at the moment just

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:30:25PM +0100, Stefan Bellon wrote: In total, the Subversion repositories hold over 45000 revisions. The first 5000 revisions were converted in a quite acceptable time. But then things started to slow down. At the moment (at revision 8150) one Fossil commit takes

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Stefan Bellon
On Fri, 21 Dec, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:30:25PM +0100, Stefan Bellon wrote: In total, the Subversion repositories hold over 45000 revisions. The first 5000 revisions were converted in a quite acceptable time. But then things started to slow down. At the moment

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Richard Hipp
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:30:25PM +0100, Stefan Bellon wrote: In total, the Subversion repositories hold over 45000 revisions. The first 5000 revisions were converted in a quite acceptable time. But then

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 09:33:26AM -0500, Richard Hipp wrote: On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:30:25PM +0100, Stefan Bellon wrote: In total, the Subversion repositories hold over 45000 revisions. The first

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Matt Welland
Some time ago I did experiments with large numbers of commits and large amounts of data and I thought the fossil performance was quite acceptable. I did see things slow down but I don't recall it being as dramatic as what you are describing. How does your replay script work? Are you overlapping

[fossil-users] Can't commit to new repository.

2012-12-21 Thread Sean Woods
Hello All, I apologize for the rather elementary question, but I can't seem to clone a remote repository and commit to it. I've created a remote user for myself and given it every possible permission. I've been able to push and pull to different repositories on this server before. I've pasted

Re: [fossil-users] Can't commit to new repository.

2012-12-21 Thread Richard Hipp
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Sean Woods s...@seanwoods.com wrote: Hello All, I apologize for the rather elementary question, but I can't seem to clone a remote repository and commit to it. I've created a remote user for myself and given it every possible permission. I've been able to

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil scalability

2012-12-21 Thread Stefan Bellon
On Fri, 21 Dec, Matt Welland wrote: How does your replay script work? Are you overlapping the subversion repo with the fossil one and doing an svn update so that fossil only sees the files touched that actually changed? That's what I'm trying at the moment in order to see whether that helps.

Re: [fossil-users] Can't commit to new repository.

2012-12-21 Thread Sean Woods
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012, at 07:32 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Sean Woods s...@seanwoods.com wrote: Hello All, I apologize for the rather elementary question, but I can't seem to clone a remote repository and commit to it. I've created a remote user for