Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Chuck Lever wrote:
in my case the merges were taking significantly longer than a half
second. making this change is certainly not worth it if merges are
running fast...
Note that in cold-cache cases, all the expense of read-tree is in actually
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Yes, the reading of three trees upfront is probably the culprit
in your case
However, note that _most_ tree reading just reads one.
Merges may take half a second, and yes, when I did it, the fact that we
move things around in
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Chuck Lever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
for the past two weeks i've been attempting to replace the active_cache
array with an abstract data type (linked list just as a prototype) in
order to eliminate the need to use memmove() during insertions and
deletions
3 matches
Mail list logo
