On 8/14/06, Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday, 14 August 2006, at 13:42:19 (+0900),
Carsten Haitzler wrote:
snip
checkouts from svn are just ridiculous. agreed. but its the server
side i am asking about. as i said - i HEARD it is easier on the
server - i am after
On 8/14/06, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. devel cvs server + future web server (for downloads too of official
tarballs etc.)
2. an anonymous cvs server and possibly second download mirror.
so 2 systems really.
i hear that svn is significantly less load for anonymous
I will try to benchmark cvs, subversion and git today. If this doesn't take me
too long I might throw in Mercurial as well.
I'll set up a (insert one of the above SCMs) server on my desktop, with the
repository on a tmpfs, with the enlightenment repository, and I'll grab it 100
times with my
These changes where made because the e_config_dialog_new() function had
two extra parameters added to it. Please update your e17/apps/e, then
try compiling the modules again.
These patches are not needed.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
And what do you think about opening some mirrors ?
I know that raster enjoys knowing the numbers of people using the cvs,
etc...
Maybe, mirrors could give statistics and works togethers...
An other possibility is to make the official source's tree under cvs,
and make a git mirror, an other
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:41:09AM +0300, Eugen Minciu wrote:
I will try to benchmark cvs, subversion and git today. If this doesn't take
me too long I might throw in Mercurial as well.
Thanks! Be sure to post the results on the web somewhere, as I'm sure
other large projects may be interested
Made a patch
1. able it to compile fine.
2. adding a modules icons. (actualy pointing to NULL, i need to finish
the libentrance_modules.so :))
icon is in : 48x48/mimetypes/package-x-generic.png
? Makefile
? Makefile.in
? aclocal.m4
? autom4te.cache
? compile
? config.guess
? config.h
Enlightenment CVS wrote:
-/* FIXME: No unnecessary includes in exported headers. */
+/* FIXME: No unnecessary includes in exported headers, when things settle
down and we know what is unnecessary. */
#include string.h
+#include strings.h
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
#include
Enlightenment CVS wrote:
Enlightenment CVS committal
Author : rhapsodhy
Project : e17
Module : proto
Dir : e17/proto/entrance_edit_gui/src/widgets
Modified Files:
Entrance_Widgets.h Makefile.am ew_button.c ew_button.h
ew_messagebox.c ew_messagebox.h
Added Files:
I was just about to say the same thing; the only thing I lack is a
suitably huge CVS repository to start with -- is there any way for me
to make a local mirror of E's whole repository? Google fails me the
specific procedure...
tmpfs,
In real life disks will be involved, it'd probably be good
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:55:50 +0100 Shish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I was just about to say the same thing; the only thing I lack is a
suitably huge CVS repository to start with -- is there any way for me
to make a local mirror of E's whole repository? Google fails me the
specific procedure...
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:55:50 +0100
Shish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In real life disks will be involved, it'd probably be good to take
them into account. (I'd recommend doing both, to see what effect the
I'll grab it 100 times with my laptop
...
I was thinking a more appropriate benchmark
I have a problem because I didn't get all the cvs (just e17) and I don't
have the history information anymore (you can't keep it unless you use
a mechanism like rsync).
It was mentioned earlier that the large amount of history information
was SVN's bottleneck when you check out a fresh copy;
This little patch if for the e_config_dialog_new error.
LMA1980
*** e_mod_config.c Mon Aug 14 19:57:28 2006
--- /root/e_modules/bling/e_mod_config.cMon Aug 14 19:05:14 2006
*** _config_bling_module(E_Container *con, B
*** 44,50
v-advanced.create_widgets =
Stéphane Bauland wrote:
Made a patch
1. able it to compile fine.
2. adding a modules icons. (actualy pointing to NULL, i need to finish
the libentrance_modules.so :))
nicey nicey nicey :)
I can't wait. Remember to grab me if you need anything from me. Way to
go roo[t|k]moo[t|k] ;)
On Tuesday, 15 August 2006, at 19:01:54 (+1000),
David Seikel wrote:
Your anti-SVN message is starting to sound like it's coming from
someone that hasn't actually run a SVN server recently.
I admin 2 and am a developer on a third. But by all means, please
feel free to continue assuming I must
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 13:57:42 -0400 Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
But by all means, please feel free to continue assuming I must not
know what I'm talking about because my opinion differs with yours.
It's much easier to write me off than to actually consider what I
have to say.
On Wednesday, 16 August 2006, at 04:09:54 (+1000),
David Seikel wrote:
I'm not assuming anything, I am responding to what you are actually
saying.
That was the first time you'd actually responded to *me*, and the only
other response you made indirectly to me was about the backend. I'll
refer
Hi,
I've spent a lot of time on this, but the results are ... shall we say ...
interesting. Before proceeding I have to remind you, again that I only used e17
without the version info, so you will probably want to try this out for
yourself.
The script I wrote checked the average time for a
On Tuesday, 15 August 2006, at 22:12:47 (+0300),
Eugen Minciu wrote:
CVS:
- Average checkout time: 41.843s
- CPU used: Constantly around 70% (something like 60-80%
- MEM used: 2-3%
SVN (svnserve):
- Average checkout time: 27.921s
- CPU used: 50-90%
- Mem used: 2%
SVN (http):
-
On 8/15/06, Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd also be interested in comparisons of incremental checkouts. As I
understand it, Git trees are complete repositories, not just
checkouts. So a checkout-to-checkout comparison is unfair as Git is
downloading a crapload more data
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eugen Minciu wrote:
snip
Now I know this is probably not going to sound right but how about a git
repository?.
snip
You may be interested in reading our[0] thread[1] about our search for
an SCM, with us deciding, in the end, on git. Mainly git is
On Tuesday, 15 August 2006, at 14:31:53 (-0700),
Inc wrote:
well, I've done a bit of a research on SVN vs. CVS.
Research isn't what we need. Performance comparison data is.
The general census is that SVN was created to improve and replace
CVS.
Yes, we know that. Whether it actually
well, thats what this is KainX. I have pretty much secured a donated box. I have also been working with raster to find the right box for us to buy. the place that I was going to have host the mirror said that its time for us to go get our own box, so I let raster know that. I'll update you more on
Well I went outside for a while and it did me good. I have a new ideea for
testing out the scm servers. Yay ;)
Instead of trying to actually save the items on my hard disk I'll try to
redirect them to /dev/null. I allready saw how I can do this with cvs and I
hope I'll find a way to do it with
It seems to me that our SCM system feature requirements are extremely
limited. We hardly ever tag or branch, let alone do merging between
branches or anything resembling changeset management.
I think CVS amply provides the features we need. It's simple and robust.
It's far from perfect, but as
On Tuesday, 15 August 2006, at 15:04:06 (-0700),
Inc wrote:
well, thats what this is KainX. I have pretty much secured a donated
box. I have also been working with raster to find the right box for
us to buy. the place that I was going to have host the mirror said
that its time for us to go
So, if anyone has any connections now would be the time to mention it. these are the specs as we are thinking so far.cpu: dual core (amd (opteron) or intel (xeon)) (in my opinion, amd is a better chip and cheaper in some aspects. you can flame me on this one)
ram: 3-4gb of quality
Kim Woelders wrote:
It seems to me that our SCM system feature requirements are extremely
limited. We hardly ever tag or branch, let alone do merging between
branches or anything resembling changeset management.
I think CVS amply provides the features we need. It's simple and robust.
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 19:07:13 +0200 Tilman Sauerbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
babbled:
Eugen Minciu [2006-08-14 15:29]:
Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
It has come to my attention that yet again we are killing systems.
yes - we are becoming a burden on yet more cvs servers. we are
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 01:07:12 +0300 Eugen Minciu [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
Well I went outside for a while and it did me good. I have a new ideea for
testing out the scm servers. Yay ;)
Instead of trying to actually save the items on my hard disk I'll try to
redirect them to /dev/null. I
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:58:42 -0400 Michael Jennings [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
On Wednesday, 16 August 2006, at 04:09:54 (+1000),
David Seikel wrote:
I'm not assuming anything, I am responding to what you are actually
saying.
That was the first time you'd actually responded to *me*,
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:55:50 +0100 Shish [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
I was just about to say the same thing; the only thing I lack is a
suitably huge CVS repository to start with -- is there any way for me
to make a local mirror of E's whole repository? Google fails me the
specific
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 02:10:02 +1000 David Seikel [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:55:50 +0100 Shish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I was just about to say the same thing; the only thing I lack is a
suitably huge CVS repository to start with -- is there any way for me
to make a
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 00:08:18 +0200 Kim Woelders [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
It seems to me that our SCM system feature requirements are extremely
limited. We hardly ever tag or branch, let alone do merging between
branches or anything resembling changeset management.
I think CVS amply
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 19:11:57 +0300 Eugen Minciu [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:55:50 +0100
Shish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In real life disks will be involved, it'd probably be good to take
them into account. (I'd recommend doing both, to see what effect the
I'll grab
Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:34:57 -0400 Kevin Brosius [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
Kim Woelders wrote:
It seems to me that our SCM system feature requirements are extremely
limited. We hardly ever tag or branch, let alone do merging between
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:07:16 +0900
Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
actually - i think we need to know how this works WITH data on disk - why?
some
scm's may invoke much more disk IO than others and thus bottleneck at the disk
earlier than others. we need to know.
Now I wonder what that 'Attatch' button does? ...
Sorry bout that.
Eugen.
scm_benchmark.rb
Description: Binary data
-
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with
39 matches
Mail list logo
