Thanks for the details, On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 16:41:38 +0200, Florian Gilcher wrote: > > I had dumbly plugged in "4474726631771 nanoseconds in minutes" into > > Google's converter tool but missed a digit. With the new 74 minute > > number, that can't mean what I assumed it meant. Then what do these > > times correspond to? > > Well, the call times can be way beyond the runtime. It is the sum > of the delta between all function entry timestamps and their corresponding > exit. > So, 4 threads entering __semwait_signal and waiting for 10 minutes would > cause the sum to be 40 minutes.
Is there a way to get something that looks more like the runtime? > Well, the good question that mornfall raised in the IRC channel is whether > Darcs is at fault here or just the victim of a fight of some IO layer vs. the > operating system. There's also this comment by Jason: | I have a hunch that __semwait_signal is very low level. Low enough that it | might be where the darcs process blocks when waiting for disk IO. If that's | true then I would consider long times there a symptom not a cause. So how can we chip away at the problem? * Is testing darcs -f-mmap useful? Maybe it could at least give us a simpler Darcs to play with? * Perhaps produce a cut down version of Darcs that only knows how to locally darcs get a repository? Perhaps we can keep simplifying this until it's a small self-contained artificial tester. * Perhaps produce an artificial version of the GHC repository, with the same number of files, and the same number of patches but all nearly empty? What else can we do to gain insight? Thanks! > > [1] And if you happen to be in an undergraduate university setting > > taking a similar class <http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cse381/>, pay > > more attention! It seems 1998-Eric's effort was woefully inadequate. > > Thanks, too late as well. :-) That wistful note was actually addressed to darcs-users as a whole But maybe we're all relatively old and grumpy. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> For a faster response, please try +44 (0)1273 64 2905.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
