Simon Marlow <[email protected]> writes:
> On 28/12/09 18:29, Eric Kow wrote:
>
>> I recommend just trying this to see how it feels. So I think what
>> makes --lazy work well in practice is that in practice, one does not
>> actually consult the patches that are far back in history very often.
>> If they do, it causes some fetching but only once. So I don't think
>> this sort of thing really constitutes high variability:
>>
>> fast fast fast fast SLOW fast fast fast
>
> If the patches are in your local cache, is there any reason for the
> SLOW case at all?
There is: the very first time, when the cache is seeded :-)
> Why doesn't darcs just use the patches from the cache, instead of
> linking them into _darcs/patches and wasting an inode?
Every week, I
find ~/.cache/ -atime +31 -delete
That is, any cache file (including ~/.cache/darcs) that hasn't been
accessed in the last month is deleted. If there weren't hard links in
my repo's _darcs, this cache cleanup could potentially delete the last
copy of a patch.
> Is it to avoid the extra lookup? In which case, perhaps looking in
> the cache *first* might be better?
No comment. Perhaps someone cares to benchmark this idea?
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
