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

Re: Is sqlite fast enough?

From: Matthew Bentham <mjb67_at_artvps.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:50:49 +0000

On 22/02/2010 11:42, Matthew Bentham wrote:
> On 22/02/2010 11:13, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Matthew Bentham<mjb67_at_artvps.com> writes:
>>
>>> For me on CYGWIN_NT-6.0-WOW64 brahe 1.7.1(0.218/5/3) 2009-12-07 11:48
>>> i686 Cygwin
>>
>> Thanks for testing!
>>
>>> $ svn --version
>>> svn, version 1.6.9 (r901367)
>>>
>>> Create the test repo using the shell script, repeat "$ time svn
>>> status" a few times:
>>> real 0m37.303s
>>> real 0m15.754s
>>> real 0m15.832s
>>
>> I know Subversion is slow on Windows but that is extreme, it's about
>> the same as my Linux machine when the cache is cold and it has to wait
>> for real disk IO; once in memory its an order of magnitude faster. I
>> suspect the cygwin layer might be contributing to that (15 seconds of
>> CPU). Would it be possible for you to try "svn status" with a
>> non-cygwin client?
>>
>
> Sure:
>
> /cygdrive/c/Program\ Files\ \(x86\)/CollabNet\ Subversion/svn.exe --version
> svn, version 1.6.5 (r38866)
> compiled Aug 21 2009, 21:38:11
>
> time /cygdrive/c/Program\ Files\ \(x86\)/CollabNet\ Subversion/svn.exe
> status
>
> real 0m8.569s
> real 0m8.599s
> real 0m8.611s
>
> Quite a bit faster :-) Not as fast as your 1.1s on Debian though :-(
> The machine is a 2.5Ghz Core2 Quad running Vista 64.
>
> Matthew
>

MMm, those latter tests were also done within a cygwin bash shell so
that I could use "time", but I've just tried in a Windows cmd shell
using my wristwatch and got the same times.

M
Received on 2010-02-22 12:51:27 CET

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