First of all, Apache Subversion supports write-through proxying that should help you to deploy a local read only replica of the SVN repository. Such repository replica should help you improve performance of all read Subversion operations (e.g. svn checkout
, svn update
, svn log
etc). Write operations (svn commit
, svn import
etc) will still go to the remote repository. But unfortunately, write-through proxy solutuion can be difficult to setup, a burden to maintain and has some downsides.
In the second place, if your Subversion server is VisualSVN Server then you can use its Multisite Repository Replication (VDFS) feature that is free of all write-through proxy problems and is generally more than 10x times faster. VDFS was developed to solve the WAN bottleneck for distributed teams using Subversion so I guess that it should help in your particular case.
When choosing between a write-through proxy solution and VDFS we at VisualSVN Team are definitely sure that VDFS is the ultimate winner. There are numerous points where VDFS wins actually. First and foremost benefit of VDFS is the fact that Subversion users will notice huge performance improvements when accessing Subversion repositories but they will not even notice that there is any special system deployed. VDFS is 100% transparent (invisible I'd say) for users.
Compared with write-through proxy, VDFS
I'd like to note that Multisite Repository Replication feature is not available in VisualSVN Server Standard Edition (free). The feature requires Enterprise Edition license (paid) to be installed on all server instances using the feature.