On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 17:59, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 1:17 PM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I was thinking of using svn ls to create a listing file which would be > > cached locally. > > Unfortunately, some observations (numbers below are approximate): > > svn up on a populated iclas directory: one second > > svn ls on iclas: two seconds, but only returns depth one > > svn ls on iclas --depth infinity: one minute > > What's most concerning is not just the elapsed time, but that this > likely means that the call is expensive on the server, which may > impact other users. > > I see this as premature optimisation; we don't know whether svn list is more expensive than svn update overall. There may be other reasons why list is slower. Nor do we know if the request will impact other users. Besides, if the code checks SVN info first, it will only need to fetch the updated listing when there has been a change. Those directories are not busy. Furthermore, every time a new test installation is set up, there is definitely a large load on the server and network. This network load in particular must be orders of magnitude greater than for a listing. > - Sam Ruby >
