On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 03:57:20PM +0000, John Goerzen wrote: > On 2005-05-16, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * John Goerzen: > >> Yes, I can do that more regularly, but that doesn't actually reduce the > >> size of the inventory file, does it? > > > > Ah, you must run "optimize", too: > > I've tested that on some smaller repos, but this is taking a LONG time: > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 30817 jgoerzen 26 1 288m 253m 99m R 93.2 25.3 97:10.80 darcs > > I tagged, then ran darcs optimize --checkpoint. This is darcs 1.0.2. > > Is this normal? > > I left it running overnight on the server, and it finished at some > point, but I didn't think to time it. The above is on my workstation.
Optimize --checkpoint costs the same as a darcs get--actually a bit more, since it needs to write the checkpoint patch as well. But for what Florian requested, you don't need to create a checkpoint. Just running optimize with no arguments will split the inventory on the latest tag, so users with up-to-date repositories won't need to download old histories. Actually, now that I think about it, optimize --checkpoint *also* is worse than an "initial record", which is one of the things that darcs has trouble with--but Ian has largely fixed in darcs-unstable. So assuming you're running darcs 1.0.2, I'd guess that this is a fixed problem. Perhaps Ian can double-check that optimize --checkpoint doesn't have any stupid-hanging-onto-memory issues, since this is an important and necesary command for large repositories with lots of read-only users (e.g. linux kernel). -- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
