> I have to think that Eclipse is reasonably efficient at doing a
> refresh. You can have a large project on local disk and if you
> refresh it and it is already in synch it runs in just a second or two.
> So I do not think it can be doing a full crawl of all of the files
> (although I do not see how else it could do it).
A second or two! Wow if it should be running that fast there must be
something seriously wrong with my setup. Perhaps Eclipse itself has a
problem working on network drives? Or perhaps its a windows thing...
eclipse might be able to hook into some OS-level thing when working
locally that it can't use when accessing a network drive.
Its so hard to tell with Eclipse, since it could be any one of a number
of plugins that are causing the refresh to be slow, and I have ended up
complaining about subclipse simply because that is the most visibly
affected function for me.
> So the question is will it be significantly faster for us to crawl the
> structure and gather all the .svn folders and then refresh each of
> those, versus just letting Eclipse do it all itself? Given that in
> the switch case, more than half the total amount of files still need
> to be processed, it seems likely to not be much faster to me. I think
> it is worth trying if someone wants to setup the tests. The patch is
> fairly easy.
Is it just a matter of checking out the subclipse source, applying the
patch. Running some java compile command, and dropping a JAR somewhere?
If it's that simple I can give it a shot, as long as you can tell me
what the compile command should look like and where to put the JAR.
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subclipse.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-01-09 01:31:38 CET