Re: wc_db API discussion

Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com> writes:

> I think it should be faster overall. Like Ivan, I think status and
> update on large working copies are areas where I would like to see
> show significant improvements.
>
> I can live with some operations being comparable to 1.6. I do not
> think we can accept any major regressions in performance. It looks
> like checkout is currently a major regression (but we should try to
> codify that). It definitely looks like NFS mounted working copies is
> a major regression. I do not think we can ship without getting those
> back to 1.6 levels.

Subversion has always been slower on network disks and 1.7 has made the
problem worse:

Checkout to local disk:

1.6: 8.5s
1.7: 8.5s

Checkout to NFS disk:

1.6: 1min 59s
1.7: 6min 49s

Update with no changes on local disk:

1.6: 0.2s
1.7: 1.3s

Update with no changes on NFS disk:

1.6: 2s
1.7: 50s

Local checkout looks OK, but that is probably because the database
operations are dominated by network/pristine/working operations.

My experience with status:
  http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-10/0350.shtml
leads me to believe that we can only get acceptable performance by
reducing the number of queries. I have no idea how we do that for
checkout/update.

-- 
Philip