Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:09 AM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>
>> Oh, something else I thought of: the translation between C and Python has,
>> in my experience, proven to be very costly. And svn_repos_replay() driving
>> a ChangeCollector in this situation crosses that translation boundary at
>> least 850 times. :-)
>>
>
> Hm, yeah, I considered that too, but our local SWIG expert here says
> that it's not *that* costly. Even crossing that swig boundary 1000
> times shouldn't be more than a couple of lost seconds.
>
> I guess another possibility is that the "extra" work replay() is doing
> on each changed path is somehow horrendously slow on our fs_bigtable
> implementation. I could test that, I suppose, by doing an svnsync of
> this revision from the googlecode repository to a local FSFS
> repository (the local write/commit time would be pretty tiny.)
Man, I don't know. I don't carry the title "SWIG expert" or anything, but
do you remember when I was tweaking cvs2svn so that rather than running
'svnadmin load' as an external tool, it was using the svn_repos_load_fs()
APIs via the Python bindings? I was seeing something like 2x timings (which
was why I abandoned the concept).
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=1011930
Received on 2009-01-08 17:24:41 CET