On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Trent W. Buck <[email protected]> wrote: > Daniel Carrera <[email protected]> writes: > >> Eric Kow wrote: >>> I think we should give darcsit (*) a second chance. >> >> Ok. But I'll mention that OpenOffice has had exactly the same problem >> for many years (but using CVS instead of Darcs) and they have never >> found a solution to the speed problems other than to "staticize" the >> website from time to time. >> >> My personal opinion is that running a website directly off of a SCM is >> a mistake. But oh well. > > ikiwiki works by serving static pages. The static pages are recompiled > by a post-apply hook. Thus, the cost of serving a page is low, but the > cost of an edit is high (particularly since several index pages need to > be recompiled). I think browser-based editing is done by having a CGI > script that edits the working tree and then does a commit. > > I get the impression that for every GET request, gitit > > 1. Asks Darcs when the source document was last changed. > 2. If it is more recent than the cached HTML version, > recompiles the cached HTML version. > 3. Serves the cached HTML version. > > I don't really see why this needs to be done for every READ, instead of > for every WRITE. It seems to me that reads are orders of magnitude more > frequent than writes.
Suppose someone pushed a bunch of patches. How would checking only on writes through the web interface interact with that? -- gwern _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
