> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] On Behalf Of Grzegorz Sobanski > Sent: 19 October 2011 11:44 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Trac] What is the difference between svn and > svnfs (and direct-svnfs)? > > * Cooke, Mark <[email protected]> [2011-10-19 10:41]: > > > These two are synonyms. It's what you should normally use. > > > > > I was wondering why we had two synonyms, I assumed > something like 'svn' would use e.g. server based access (svn: > or http:) whilst svnfs would use direct (file:) access (which > seemed like it would be dangerous). > > > > Does this require the post-commit changeset hook? > > Well, it does not require it. You can enable synchronizing on every > request, but I would recommend against it. Solution with the hook > is much more effective. > > > > > * direct-svnfs > > > > > > This one bypasses the cache, so you don't need to resync > Trac to the > > > repository, and changesets are picked up automatically. > But it's also > > > much, much slower. > > > > > ..so this is the 0.11 method of checking the repository on > every access (no hook required)? > > No. > 0.11 was caching everything too, but it checked on every request if > there is something new in the repository to be cached. > direct-svnfs does not cache nothing, it always goes to the repository > if it needs some info about it. > > > -- > greets > silk > Thanks for the clarification (from a David Eddings fan).
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-users?hl=en.
