well i (we) appreciate this honest assessment of where we're at with
this. until your email the standard dev response has been "turn your
virus checker off" or "its not slow for me" or "you don't know what
you're talking about, we don't believe you".
thx.
On Feb 17, 2009, at 8:42 PM- Feb 17, 2009, Greg Stein wrote:
>> ...
>> No my friend, this is an issue on Linux and OSX too. The fact that
>> you
>> don't have an issue is (in the grand scheme) irrelevant. Look through
>> the
>> archives for all the folks that are having issues on Linux
>> filesystems.
>
> Yup. We've known for a long time that the working copy is slow. You
> should have seen it eight years ago!! Geebus.
>
> Over time, we've added a lot of things to improve the performance,
> but it is *still* slow. It just creates too many files, and (thus)
> needs to open/read too many files.
>
> There are two problems that have held back fixing this problem:
>
> * the WC library is NASTY. And when I say "nasty", I mean *heart-
> stoppingly* nasty. Not really through any fault of the developers
> over the past 8+ years, but that when we started we had no idea what
> all was needed. So the library grew organically into "kind of" the
> right direction. And then we added features. And more features. And
> grew it in other ways. And more features. Today? Hazmat suit
> territory.
>
> * developers don't want to get near the WC library, as a result of
> above. They don't want to break it (but they do anyways cuz it is so
> complex), and they don't want to deal with all that cruft.
>
> Fast-forward to August, 2008. After a four-ish year long hiatus from
> SVN development, I'm back and am tackling the WC library problem.
> I've got time on my hands and am more than willing to fix this
> issue. It has gone on long enough, and has held up quite a bit of
> feature development (and caused quite a few bugs). My start was
> pretty slow, but with the 1.6 branch it should pick up speed. Hyrum
> has also jumped into the fray as of a couple months ago.
>
> I dunno how long Hyrum can stay on this task, but I have nothing
> else to do but fix it. And it *will* get fixed.
>
>> ...
>> I am patient but this Subversion performance with large wc's has been
>> an issue for years now. I repeat YEARS! And this is largely because
>> of
>> people like you telling us that there is no issue and the SVN
>> developers
>> working out there in remote locations with a single working copy on a
>> permanently cached laptop. Completely unrealistic..
>
> Calling us out-of-touch hermits isn't a solution here. See above for
> why we're here.
>
>> My prediction is that 1.7 will not show up before this time next
>> year.
>
> Thanks for the vote of confidence here. What kind of money you want
> to bet on this? I have a lot of money to pony up. And a lot of time.
> Do you want to put *anything* on the table, or just write emails?
>
>> ...
>
> Yes, we do listen to users. All the time. Just because we don't
> listen to *you* doesn't mean we're ignorant or out of touch. It just
> means we have different priorities than what you'd like to see.
> Maybe we're listening to different users, or (gasp!) maybe we're
> listening to our own Muse as we work on this code and *giving* our
> time and effort to you.
>
> -g
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=1183455
>
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
> ].
>
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=1188037
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-02-18 21:54:14 CET