[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Case study: Mono switches to Subversion

From: Marcin Kasperski <Marcin.Kasperski_at_softax.com.pl>
Date: 2004-11-17 21:18:00 CET

> In svn 1.0, 'blame' was about 100x slower than CVS. In svn
> 1.1, it's about 10x slower. I really can't think of any way
> to make it faster, other than doing what CVS does: keeping a
> cache of contextual diffs on the server, so the server can
> instantly generate annotation.

I know nothing about the subversion internals but what about
generic speed-up technique - caching! First, if svn blame is
really run very often, there is good chance that someone calling
it will find cached reply just sent to someone else, ready to
use as no commit occured after it. Second, if there is cached
result of svn blame blahblah.cxx at revision 17784, next svn
blame blahblah.cxx comes and repo is at revision 17787, we have
to analyze only diffs between 17784 and 17787 and apply them to
the cached data.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 17 21:18:24 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.