I downloaded the Windows 1.18 version (supposedly build with mingw) from
the website and tested it getting the same results as my previous post's
timings ('delete' mode and 'wal' mode).
Using Sysinternals' Process Monitor it was clear that fossil was reading
all the way through the repository
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 01:45:29PM +0800, mjbmik...@gmail.com wrote:
It is the Windows version.
I'm currently in the process of commiting a new 0 byte file to an existing
2GB repo and Windows task manager says that the fossil process has read 3GB
of data since I issued the commit command
On Sep 29, 2011, at 1:40 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
In the past there have been issues with output that rebuild sometimes
generates. I haven't pressed that button lately, so I don't know if those
issues are currently fixed or not.
As of [2cd21f8dc2] (trunk: [ce354d0a9f]) there shouldn't be
Just a thought - is there some virus-scanning software involved, that feels a
need to scan every file opened?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
-Original Message-
From: Lluís Batlle i Rossell virik...@gmail.com
Sender: fossil-users-boun...@lists.fossil-scm.org
Date: Thu, 29 Sep
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:15:15 +
ala...@snell-pym.org.uk wrote:
Just a thought - is there some virus-scanning software involved, that
feels a need to scan every file opened?
The OP got the same results on Ubuntu which supposedy is not infested
with antivirus software.
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Jeff Slutter j...@slutter.com wrote:
Interesting...
I failed to mention in my post that my version of fossil was from 'trunk'
sometime this afternoon, build with MSVC 2008. I also made one minor change
to fix handling for repos 2gig (MSVC build version
What's the rationale for disallowing [ and ] in filenames? Are there any
systems that don't like them (maybe FAT)? Or maybe this is due to collision
with [wiki/ci links]?
From file_is_simple_pathname(const char *z):
** * Does not contain any of these characters in the path: \*[]?
To open the repository to a new checkout it took Fossil about 26
minutes. Roughly 13 minutes extracting the files into the directory, and
then 13 minutes of ... doing something, before it came back.
The equivalent command in Mercurial (hg update null to reset the
checkout then the timed hg
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:27 AM, Dmitry Chestnykh
dmi...@codingrobots.comwrote:
What's the rationale for disallowing [ and ] in filenames? Are there any
systems that don't like them (maybe FAT)? Or maybe this is due to collision
with [wiki/ci links]?
Special characters like this are a
Actually, FAT and NTFS both support brackets in file names. I ran into this
issue of brackets when trying to version uncompressed Office 2007 documents
(docx is just a zip that contains xml files, including a [Content-Types].xml
at the root).
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 13:43, Richard Hipp
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Jeff Slutter j...@slutter.com wrote:
Add was sub 1 second
Commit took 59 seconds
A few weeks ago someone posted about horrible performance in his BSD Ports
repo - many tens of thousands of files. Richard explained (though i cannot
find the post at the moment)
Some good news...
I came in to work, disabled repo-cksum, on the copy of the repository at
work and tested again. Single file commit took 6 seconds. I made a
number of changes to files (11 files total, a collection of edits, adds
and removes) and did a fossil commit (without specifying files
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Jeff Slutter j...@slutter.com wrote:
I don't know if that 6 seconds can be improved on, but I am definitely
much happier than I was yesterday.
We all love success stories! Keep 'em coming! :)
And thanks for having the patience to try to get to the bottom of
Dear archeologists,
Please review changes in the following branch:
http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?r=dmitry-security
The more eyes the better, as it touches login code.
I try to protect against timing attacks on login, cookies, and sync by using
the constant-time comparison
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:31:19AM -0400, Jeff Slutter wrote:
There seems to be a minimum time of 6 seconds for my operations of
status, changes, and commit, and it would make sense that they all
have to do the same work at some point (that would be 'finding out
what files have changed')
What
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Dmitry Chestnykh
dmi...@codingrobots.comwrote:
The more eyes the better, as it touches login code.
...COMPARE(A, PASSWORD) returns FALSE in 0.1 msec, but
COMPARE(P, PASSWORD) returns FALSE in 0.3 msec, because it did
two comparisons:
Given
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 08:15:55PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Dmitry Chestnykh
dmi...@codingrobots.comwrote:
The more eyes the better, as it touches login code.
...COMPARE(A, PASSWORD) returns FALSE in 0.1 msec, but
COMPARE(P, PASSWORD)
On 9/29/2011 2:12 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
What Operating System is that on? There might be a limit to the number
of filesystem objects that can be cached and your tree just large enough
to not fit into it. Another thing to try is forcing the _FOSSIL_ file
into cache (e.g. cat _FOSSIL_
Thanks for this - I'm definitely going to need it, and will try to make time
to do some tests next week :)
On 27 September 2011 06:12, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi, all!
With almost 90kb of new functionality and 21 pages of draft spec docs[1],
the JSON branch has reached a
Hiya, core dev(s),
In timeline_cmd(), is there a reason that:
db_find_and_open_repository(0, 0);
showfilesFlag = find_option(showfiles,f, 0)!=0;
db_find_and_open_repository(0, 0);
db_find_and_open_repository() is called twice, or is that a mistake? That
can cause db_verify_schema() to be
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:45 PM, David Bovill da...@architex.tv wrote:
Thanks for this - I'm definitely going to need it, and will try to make
time to do some tests next week :)
If you're looking for a staring point/demo, see ajax/index.html and friends.
Any and all feedback is welcomed.
On Sep 29, 2011, at 20:15 , Stephan Beal wrote:
Given the relatively high overhead fossil has when it opens a db or runs a
query, and network latency, i cannot imagine that someone could accurately
time the difference of a memcmp() operation on 8 or 10 bytes. The number of
factors involved
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:07:37PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Dmitry Chestnykh
dmi...@codingrobots.comwrote:
I posted a link about this concern:
http://rdist.root.org/2010/01/07/timing-independent-array-comparison/
So why not simply add the following
So why not simply add the following logic to server mode:
A) fetch config option add-random-sleep (integer, default=0)
B) if ((A)0) AND user is nobody, sleep for random 1..(A) ms. (This attack
would seem to be useless for anyone but the nobody user. If you're logged in,
you've got your
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Dmitry Chestnykh
dmi...@codingrobots.comwrote:
I posted a link about this concern:
http://rdist.root.org/2010/01/07/timing-independent-array-comparison/
So why not simply add the following logic to server mode:
A) fetch config option add-random-sleep
2011/9/29 Lluís Batlle i Rossell virik...@gmail.com
Well, if someone has studied those attacks, and the code by dmitry looks
fine
and works based on some heavier studies than our first thoughts on that,
let's
use it. No?
i can't object, i just think it's paranoid :).
--
- stephan
On 09/26/11 15:02, Richard Hipp wrote:
Richard seem to have released 1.19 binary for Windows compiled with Visual
Studio, while 1.18
has been compiled with MinGW.
Correct. I didn't realized there was a difference.
Should I make a point of always building future Fossil releases using
27 matches
Mail list logo
