> From: Pollähne. Ullrich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > The script contains a main target that simply calls the others with > antcall (since it is simpler to edit than editing the depends attribute). > > Doing it this way: > <antcall target="removeOldArtifacts" /> ... > > <!-- refresh the eclipse workspace if inside eclipse --> > <antcall target="refreshWorkspace"/> > takes 32 seconds (31 with a fixed heap of 80MB) with ANT 1.6.5. > > Doing it this way: > <antcall> > <target name="removeOldArtifacts" /> ... > > <!-- refresh the eclipse workspace if inside eclipse --> > <target name="refreshWorkspace"/> > </antcall> > just takes 12 seconds (with a fixed heap of 80MB) with ANT 1.6.5. > And this is nearly the same speed as with ANT 1.6.2. > So it seems that the dependency checking is slowing down the script. > > The above targets do define some properties and then call the get task > (indirectly, they call a presetdef). They do not define any dependency, > just plain '<target name="getBIS6ModulesArtifacts">'.
That's interesting. What you are saying is that <antcall> is expensive because it creates a new project, which is known Ant wisdom ;-) Using the new ability to call several targets in a single <antcall> allows you to create a single Project instead of many, and is thus faster. What I think is more interesting though, is the possible slow down of <antcall> between Ant 1.6.2 and 1.6.5. If <antcall> was somehow made 2+ times slower, that's not good. Would you mind sending the output of the performance listener for the same script (with heavy <antcall>) on both versions of Ant? Could be it's the <get> task that's slower rather than <antcall> for example. Thanks, --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
