Cruise Control and Draconet and Vault Version 3.0.7.2863
Moderator: SourceGear
Since you are using Vault 3.0.x, have you thought about upgrading your Vault server to Vault 3.1.5* ?
These types of concurrency issues were addressed in the 3.1.x Servers.
If you do decide to upgrade, please make sure you have a verified valid SQL Server backup in case you run into any upgrade issues. Also, the 3.1.x upgrade makes some changes to the internal database schema, so the upgrade time is dependent on repository makeup as well as the server's hardware.
* - Vault 3.1.6 is just around the corner.
These types of concurrency issues were addressed in the 3.1.x Servers.
If you do decide to upgrade, please make sure you have a verified valid SQL Server backup in case you run into any upgrade issues. Also, the 3.1.x upgrade makes some changes to the internal database schema, so the upgrade time is dependent on repository makeup as well as the server's hardware.
* - Vault 3.1.6 is just around the corner.
Jeff Clausius
SourceGear
SourceGear
Just to clarify, my post referred to the Server deadlock/rollback log entries. The conditions that lead to log entries of this type have been addressed in the Vault 3.1.x server.
Without more information, I cannot say those log entries are related to the CC.Net / Draco.Net issues.
Without more information, I cannot say those log entries are related to the CC.Net / Draco.Net issues.
Jeff Clausius
SourceGear
SourceGear
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:25 pm
Because CC.NET (and probably Draco.NET) kick off history queries for all your projects immediately when you start it, it is possible to have concurrency-related issues, particularly if you're running a 3.0.x version of Vault. I agree with Jeff that you're likely to fix the problem by upgrading to 3.1.5.
Ian Olsen
SourceGear
SourceGear
-
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:25 pm
The upgrade is free for all Vault 3.0.x.
The answer to your other question is "it depends". The schema change is significant, and will be hardware dependent. For example, we've had 20-50GB databases take 45 minutes on decent hardware. The same database on 4 yr old hardware took > 15 hours.
I posted some tips in a previous post http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic ... t=15#20443
The answer to your other question is "it depends". The schema change is significant, and will be hardware dependent. For example, we've had 20-50GB databases take 45 minutes on decent hardware. The same database on 4 yr old hardware took > 15 hours.
I posted some tips in a previous post http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic ... t=15#20443
Jeff Clausius
SourceGear
SourceGear