On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 18:48, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, try this. It takes about 14 seconds on my machine on my copy of
Magnus's test repository. Output looks like this:
14 seconds! That sound much too slow :-)
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 18:48, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, try this. It takes about 14 seconds on my machine on my copy of
Magnus's test repository. Output looks like this:
14 seconds! That sound much
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 18:48, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, try this. It takes about 14 seconds on my machine on my copy of
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
It should get a bit faster if we reduce the number of branches it
examines, which I assume is something we can do once we desupport 7.4
and 8.0. We could also add a --since argument which would doubtless
speed things up a lot, by truncating the
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
It should get a bit faster if we reduce the number of branches it
examines, which I assume is something we can do once we desupport 7.4
and 8.0. We could also add a --since argument
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 08:17, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 18:48, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, try this. It takes about 14 seconds on my machine on my copy of
Magnus's
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 08:17, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
/me is very sorry master. Please beat your unworthy servant only
lightly... or alternatively, buy me a faster machine.
Well, I might be able to
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 09:21, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 08:17, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
/me is very sorry master. Please beat your unworthy servant only
lightly...
Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 18:48, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, try this. ?It takes about 14 seconds on my machine on my copy of
Magnus's test repository. ?Output looks like this:
14
Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
It should get a bit faster if we reduce the number of branches it
examines, which I assume is something we can do once we desupport 7.4
and 8.0. We could also add a --since argument which would doubtless
speed things up a lot, by
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
It should get a bit faster if we reduce the number of branches it
examines, which I assume is something we can do once we desupport 7.4
and 8.0. ?We could
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 09:21, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 08:17, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
/me
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:54, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 09:21, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com wrote:
On
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Attached is a ZIP file with the diffs generated when converting the
cvs repo to git based off a cvs snapshot from this morning. It
contains a diff file for every branch and every tag present. (If a
file is missing, that means there were no diffs for
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:11, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
Attached is a ZIP file with the diffs generated when converting the
cvs repo to git based off a cvs snapshot from this morning. It
contains a diff file for every branch and every tag
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:11, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The other thing that I'd like to see some data on is the commit log
entries. Can we produce anything comparable to cvs2cl output from
the test repository?
For a single branch, just
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:27, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:11, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The other thing that I'd like to see some data on is the commit log
entries. Can we produce anything comparable to
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:27, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Second, does git offer a way to collate matching log entries across
multiple branches?
But what really is the usecase there?
Generating back-branch update release notes, mainly. We
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:45, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:27, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Second, does git offer a way to collate matching log entries across
multiple branches?
But what really is the
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:45, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 20:27, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Second, does git offer a way to collate matching log entries across
multiple branches?
But what really is the
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
How exactly patches get applied into back branches? Has that been
spelled out somewhere? There are a lot of ways to do it. For
instance git.git seems to apply the patch to the earliest branch first
and then merge it on up so that everything can share
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'd be satisfied with a tool that merges commit reports if they have the
same log message and occur at approximately the same time, which is the
heuristic that cvs2cl uses.
So how do you run cvs2cl? Do you run it once in a
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 14:33, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
How exactly patches get applied into back branches?
There was discussion about that before, but I don't know whether we
really have a solution that will work comfortably.
I don't either,
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'd be satisfied with a tool that merges commit reports if they have the
same log message and occur at approximately the same time, which is the
heuristic that cvs2cl uses.
So how do
Alex Hunsaker bada...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 14:33, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'd be satisfied with a tool that merges commit reports if they have the
same log message and occur at approximately the same time, which is the
heuristic that cvs2cl uses.
I dont think
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I'd be satisfied with a tool that merges commit reports if they have the
same log message and occur at approximately
Robert Haas wrote:
Yeah, it's a bit too slow to do on every sync. ?I run it every week or
two and keep the output in a text file. ?Usually what I want the history
for is stuff that happened awhile ago, so the fact that it's not 100% up
to date is seldom a factor.
OK, try this. It takes
27 matches
Mail list logo
