Change visible name of server

[FelixAlcala]

Hello,

When I run the server configuration wizard of SCM 2.9 I cannot change the "server host", only the "Listening Port". The server host defaults to the machine name. The text says "You can change visible name in server config file ..."

I looked at server.config but did not found an obvious way to change that setting. Also in the Administrator Handbook didn't I find anything converning this.

Is it possible to change that name?

Thanks!

Felix

[The problem is I cannot get replication to work perfrom fast enough. My client cannot reach the server by its machine name as it's on the internet. When I pop a branch, the branch's source server is a machine name and I cannot really push the branch back, as this server cannot be reached by a machine name. I can, of course, specify the correct destination server by IP address in a profile, but this way on a push operation ALL the repository is sent to the server and that takes ages...]

[psantosl]

Hi Felix!

You can modify server.conf and add an entry called <ServerName>.

Something like

<ServerName>192.168.1.4</ServerName>

The point is normally to be able to make the server accessible for clients that can't reach it by name.

In 3.0 (you can contact support and request a preview NOW) we've fixed this so the replication source gets exactly the address the client wrote, and not the remote server name. It specifically fixes this.

Let me know if you can fix it with "ServerName" or if you want to give a try to 3.0.

Thanks!

pablo

[FelixAlcala]

Hi Pablo,

the <ServerName>-Thing did work. However, I did not get the performance bonus I had expected: When I push a branch to my remote server, that takes say 15 Minutes time. Then I do absolutely nothing, and push it again, and it takes another 15 Minutes. I had hoped pushing would only send the differences/changes, not the whole branch over and over again. Is this the way push should work? and if so, would there be a way to speed this up?

Thanks & have a great day,

Felix

[psantosl]

Hi Felix!

Well, the performance issue must be coming from a different source.

I don't know why it takes too long, it's definitely not normal. I'm replicating branches on a daily basis and they do never take that long!! (I mean, unless I'm replicating a HUGE one with hundreds of Mb of content).

What you point about only replicating changes is correct too. Only the new checkins should go back and forth.

Is it taking time during the "fetch" process or during the "push"?? You can check it quite precisely from the command line.

pablo