[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Large CVS Installations

From: Rachel Burns
Subject: Re: Large CVS Installations
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 20:54:46 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)

A great way of handling redundancy and scaling is to
use WANdisco CVS Replicator (

With it you can setup shared-nothing architecture.  All the
CVS repositories/replicas run on independent machines (heterogeneous
ok)  but are clustered together  using the WANdisco replicator.

Advantages are reads can scale horizontally, as most CVS traffic
is typically generated by reads (co, up, log, stat etc) you can immediately
offload disk, RAM and CPU subsystems.  Writes (commits, tag) are replicated
using a Quorum based approach which allows any node to be written to,
no single point of failure or bottleneck unlike traditional single master schemes. Basically you get the benefits of multiple servers processing power but still keep the
virtual repository abstraction - true clustering.

Redundancy and High availability is also a side effect of the shared-nothing

DHARNA, AJAY [AG/1000] wrote:

Hi all,

I am trying to get a general idea on how you handle redundancy and scaling of 
Large CVS installations. Does anyone deal with a large enough CVS installation 
to tell me how you are managing to handle this?

I would like to know whether they have spread the repository over multiple 
servers to handle a large number of users and whether you think that this is 
good or bad. Whether they are using clustering to do this and again what your 
opinions are on this. (Good and bad)

I would like to know whether you have a 1 disk volume mounted to multiple CVS 
server machines or whether you prefer to do it is another way and why you think 
that that method is more efficient.

Thank you.

Ajay Dharna

Info-cvs mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]