Re: [PATCH] gitweb: Option to omit column with time of the last change

From

Kacper Kornet <draenog@pld-linux.org>

Date

Apr 24, 2012, 17:36 UTC

Message-ID

<20120424173618.GA15600@camk.edu.pl>

In-Reply-To

<201204180136.08570.jnareb@gmail.com>

I'm sorry for the late answer.

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:36:08AM +0200, Jakub Narebski wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Apr 2012, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:06:49PM +0200, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> >> On Mon, 16 Apr 2012, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 03:16:01PM +0200, Jakub Narebski wrote:

> >>> My tests show that forks are also a bottleneck in my setup.

> >> What do you mean by "my tests" here?  Is it benchmark (perhaps just using
> >> 'timed' feature) with and without custom change removing fork(s)?  Or did
> >> you used profiler (e.g. wondefull Devel::NYTProf) for that?

> > Nothing fancy. I look at the footnote produced by "timed" feature. And
> > I see a difference between version with the following patch:

[...]

> > and the one in which  git_repo_exist() uses invocation to /bin/true:

> > diff --git a/gitweb/gitweb.perl b/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> > index 18cdf96..4bcc66f 100755
> > --- a/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> > +++ b/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> > @@ -3156,6 +3156,13 @@ sub git_get_project_owner {
> >  	return $owner;
> >  }

> > +sub git_repo_exist {
> > +	my ($path) = @_;
> > +
> > +        $git_dir = "$projectroot/$path";
> > +        return not system('/bin/true');
> > +}
> > +

> What were the differences in timing?

The best results with the host disk caches were:

> Anyway, if you plan on resending this patch series, then "gitweb: Improve
> repository verification" should be be first, I think.

-- 
  Kacper Kornet