On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Travis wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2005, at 9:46 PM, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> > On Mar 15, 2005, at 3:23 PM, Travis P wrote:
> >> On Mar 15, 2005, at 8:31 AM, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> >>> The algorithm is extremely similar to what CVS does:
First: stat working file and compare timestamp to the timestamp stored in
the entries file.
> >>> stat working and textbase files.
> >>> if (mtimes of working and textbase are equal):
> >>> return NOT_CHANGED;
> >>> else if (filesizes of working and textbase are unequal):
> >>> return CHANGED;
> >>> else
> >>> compare the files byte-by-byte. /* very slow */
> >> if (filesizes of working and textbase are unequal):
> >> return CHANGED;
> >> else if (mtimes of working and textbase are equal):
> >> return NOT_CHANGED;
> >> else
> >> compare the files byte-by-byte. /* very slow */
> > And also, I'd argue this is slower. 99% of the time, almost every
> > file in the tree will be unchanged, and will have identical
> > working/textbase timestamps. Using the current algorithm, it means
> > that 99% of the time we get a definitive "answer" to the question on
> > the first comparison. In your algorithm, we'd end up doing two
> > comparsions nearly all the time, instead of one.
> True: I am considering the cost of the extra integer comparison and
> branch to be negligible. If you are decreasing the accuracy of the
> heuristic because of that cost, it seems like an unworthwhile
> micro-optimization to me. Do you really think the cost of the
> comparison and branch are not negligible on the order of tens or maybe
> hundreds of thousands of files in a wc?
Of course,it is negible. But the problem is the first step in the
algorithm. It doesn't need to stat the base file in a common case, since
it has the timestamp in .svn/entries. If this was a real (and
reasonably common) problem, we
could ofcourse store the base filesize in the entries file as well.
Just to clarify,
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Wed Mar 16 09:11:21 2005