[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)


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.

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