From: C. Scott Ananian <cscott@cscott.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:30:22 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] write-tree performance problems
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504201128550.2630@cag.csail.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <200504201122.35448.mason@suse.com>

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Chris Mason wrote:

> With the basic changes I described before, the  100 patch time only goes down
> to 40s.  Certainly not fast enough to justify the changes.  In this case, the
> bulk of the extra time comes from write-tree writing the index file, so I
> split write-tree.c up into libwrite-tree.c, and created update-cache
> --write-tree.

Hmm.  Are our index files too large, or is there some other factor?
I was considering using a chunked representation for *all* files (not just 
blobs), which would avoid the original 'trees must reference other trees 
or they become too large' issue -- and maybe the performance issue you're 
referring to, as well?
  --scott

Boston MI6 quiche LPMEDLEY BLUEBIRD PBSUCCESS jihad biowarfare non-violent protest 
Yakima NRA EZLN DES hack SARANAC KMPLEBE Echelon PBCABOOSE security
                          ( http://cscott.net/ )