On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Simon Marlow<[email protected]> wrote: > On 26/08/2009 14:00, Eric Kow wrote: > >> Is Darcs slower on Windows and MacOS X than >> on Linux? > > I don't know if this is a new one, but 'darcs whatsnew' with hashed > repositories on Windows seems to have a performance problem:
I don't know if it's a new one either, but it's new to me and interesting. > > $ darcs show repo > Type: darcs > Format: hashed > Root: d:/builds/ghc-testing > Pristine: HashedPristine > Cache: thisrepo:d:/builds/ghc-testing, cache:C:\Documents and > Settings\simonmar\Application Data\darcs\cache > boringfile Pref: .darcs-boring > Default Remote: x:/ghc-HEAD > Num Patches: 21106 > $ time darcs w -s > No changes! > > real 0m3.126s > user 0m0.000s > sys 0m0.015s > $ darcs --version > 2.3.0 (release) > > Compared to Linux, where the time is ~0.25s. These are all local > filesystems. I see that the vast majority of that time is reported as "real". Does that give us any leads to trouble shoot this? My vague understanding of the time command is that when there is a lot of "real" time that often means the program spent most of its time in system calls or doing IO. > (I'd like to use hashed repos on Windows, mainly to avoid the > case-insensitive-filesystem issue with non-hashed repos). I don't know how much hassle this would be for you, but anytime you can send us detailed profiling reports or specific workflows that are too slow that helps us. Knowing that whatsnew --summary is too slow on the ghc repo is a good example. But also, if you sent us the darcs.prof file that helps too. And of course, Petr's work will eventually speed this up quite a bit. I don't recall if whatsnew was improved yet in HEAD, but it's on the roadmap as I understand it. Jason _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
