Francis Upton <francis@francisupton.com> wrote on 03/07/2006 10:59:46 AM:
> Please take this comment for what it's worth, and it may not be worth
much.
>
> I have been a happy subclipse user for over a year. Only recently did I
> upgrade from a .3x to a .10x version, and when I did, I noticed that a
> commit of maybe 200 files or so was way slower than it had been (I don't
> know maybe 2-3 times slower). Normally, I commit several projects at
> once. In the past I think it committed the projects separately, and it
> also committed by passing directory names to SVN. In the current
> version, it passed every filename. The SVN processing of this appears
> to be much slower (I don't have any measurements, I'm sorry about
> that). I understand the reasons for doing it this way (you want to have
> each commit be truly atomic). But I'm concerned about the performance
> tradeoff.
>
> I was not going to say anything, until I saw another person report the
> "long line" problem a few minutes ago (which seems like it needs to be
> fixed). If you are considering making changes in that area, then
> considering this performance issue might be a good idea.
The "atomic" commit feature has to do a bit of work before beginning the
commit process to group the commits by repository. That probably adds
some time to the process. Switching the adapter to JavaHL would give some
idea since it does not have that feature.
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. and SoftLanding Europe Plc by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 7 22:38:09 2006