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

Re: Blame caching (was Re: Case study: Mono switches to Subversion)

From: Mark Benedetto King <mbk_at_lowlatency.com>
Date: 2004-11-18 17:48:24 CET

On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 05:12:08PM +0100, Marcin Kasperski wrote:
> > a.) The actual effort involved in a lazy calculation may be
> > significantly higher (since the fulltexts would need to be
> > reconstructed, again).
>
> Hmm, I am not sure whether I understand this point. The price of
> calculating the current result must be paid whatever solution is
> choosen, only in case of pre-calculating it is paid by the
> commiter and in case of lazy caching by the first user of blame
> on given file. The latter seems a bit more reasonable.
>

At commit time, the cost of computing the changed lines relative
to the previous revision is somewhat lower (since we are already
doing processing involving the two revisions in question)

--ben

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 18 17:50:19 2004

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