>> Mirko Seifert wrote:
>>> I'm running TortoiseSVN 1.5.5, Build 14361 - 32 Bit on WinXP SP3
>>> and I was wondering why the TSVNCache process does run at
>>> priority "normal". Using the task manager to change the priority
>>> to "low" works fine and makes my system run much smoother,
>>> because foreground activities are not delayed by I/O or processor
>>> usage of TSVNCache.
>> I doubt that. You may think at first that it works, but it doesn't.
>> Unless you don't care that the overlay icons show the status
>> several minutes delayed.
> I'm running TSVNCache at low priority (manually) for quite a while
> and I did not recognize icons that show a wrong state. I have quite
> large repositories checked out (several gigabytes), so this bahavior
> is not explained by the number of files or directories observed by
Ok, it might work for you. But it never did properly for me and on any
computer in our office.
> As far as I understand the implications of process priorities, the
> icons should only be delayed if there is processes running at a
> higher priority than TSVNCache. This is usually the case for all user
> applications (e.g., the explorer itself). From my perspective these
> processes are more important than up-to-date icons. If I can't open
> directories, because my explorer is blocked by TSVNCache the icons do
> not buy me anything. I have collegues who actually uninstalled
> TortoiseSVN just because of this behavior.
You're forgetting something: the explorer (normal priority) asks the
cache for information (low priority). Since the cache would have low
priority, explorer would be blocked too until the low priority cache
process gets a chance to answer that request from the explorer.
So you won't gain anything, but you could even get to a point where the
explorer slows down a *lot* (waiting until timeout for the cache to
answer a status request, and that means waiting for every single item
shown in explorer because it has to ask the status for every one of them).
Try it: have an application which uses all available CPU running, while
you try browsing working copies with the explorer (reduce the process
priority of the cache process first).
> If you think lowering the priority is not appropriate for all users,
> then how about a configuration option in the settings dialog?
Sorry, I won't add an option which lets users shoot themselves in the foot.
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2008-12-05 10:59:47 CET