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

Re: svn commit: r1335639 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/adm_ops.c

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 14:34:29 -0400

On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:11 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 01:03 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 12:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net> wrote:
>>> Mark, can you see if this (and previous commits I've made) fixes the file
>>> handle abuse problem you reported?
>>>
>>> I tested this locally using "ulimit -n 200" to reduce the file handle limit
>>> on my box from 8192 to 200.  Before this change, I saw the same error you
>>> did.  Afterward, no error.  Hoping you experience the same.
>>
>> Confirmed.  This resolves it for me too.
>
> Sweet.  Thanks!

Now that I can run the test I wanted, the performance improvement is
pretty nice. Checking out our code goes from 1m35s down to 0m44s. I
cannot help but think that number should still be a lot lower though.
This scenario seems like it would be very similar to what a Git
checkout would do now, probably even less work has to be done. I do
not have a Git-svn version of our codebase to test with, but I am
guessing a Git checkout of our code would be less than 10 seconds. So
it might be an indication we could be doing more optimization in our
libraries.

That said, I still think it is a nice improvement and I imagine it
would scale up and down based on size and number of files.

Does anyone have a git version of our tree they could try this with?
How long does it take git to materialize a working copy of our trunk?

-- 
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
Received on 2012-05-08 20:35:01 CEST

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