Christian Boos wrote: > Jonas Borgström wrote: > > ... >> My main concern would be the performance impact. IIUC the default setup >> will add to two calls to get_node and two calls to get_entries for each >> "browser" request. Christian, have you done any benchmarks, is it >> noticeable? >> > > > Well, there's definitely a cost. Adding 4 folders (for a total of 70 > entries), the cost of the get_entries calls is 0.125 seconds. To rank > that, the rendering in trunk of a browser page with one entry is 0.06 > seconds and for a page with 24 entries is 0.26 seconds. So yes, this > increases quite a bit the total, to approx. 0.20 and 0.40 seconds. > > OTOH this was on Windows, so this confirms that SVN is a dog on that > platform, as is already obvious from running the unit tests. I'll retest > that on Linux in the coming days. >
Well, I've got similar numbers on Linux. But with the default setup, the cost is only approx. 0.01 seconds. It's easy to fine tune, and only get a purely "static" list of paths, e.g: [svn] tag_folders = branch_folders = branches = trunk,branches/0.9-stable,branches/0.10-stable tags= tags/trac-0.10,tags/trac-0.10.1,tags/trac-0.10.2 Furthermore, if branches and tags are also unset, then the quickjump selector is simply omitted. So I think the above qualifies as "under control" ;) -- Christian > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
