David Roundy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:11:40AM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote:
David Roundy wrote:
Anyhow, could you retry this test with the above change in methodology, and
let me know if (a) the pull is still slow the first time and (b) if it's
much faster the second time (after the reverse unpull/pull)?
I think I've done it in both directions now, and it got faster, but still
much slower than darcs1:
$ time darcs2 unpull --from-tag 2007-09-25 -a
Finished unpulling.
58.68s real 50.64s user 6.36s system 97% darcs2 unpull --from-tag
2007-09-25 -a
$ time darcs2 pull -a ../ghc-darcs2
Pulling from "../ghc-darcs2"...
Finished pulling and applying.
53.28s real 44.62s user 7.10s system 97% darcs2 pull -a ../ghc-darcs2
This is still an order of magnitude slower than darcs1 for the same
operation. (these times are now on the local filesystem, BTW)
Is this with the latest darcs-unstable? I made some improvements shortly
before Christmas (or was it after Christmas?) that ought to improve the
speed of pulls dramatically. We were doing O(N^2) operations in our
handling of "pending" changes, which I fixed (I think). So I'll wait on
investigating this until you've confirmed which version this was tested
with. And thanks for the testing!
This is using a binary I compiled up from the latest sources yesterday, so
it should have those improvements.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
