From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 12 12:25:18 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1DD18E for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:25:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jcm@visi.com) Received: from g2host.com (mailback4.g2host.com [208.42.184.244]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78AAF34B for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:25:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [208.42.90.57] (account jcm@visi.com) by mailback4.g2host.com (CommuniGate Pro WEBUSER 5.3.11) with HTTP id 12728033 for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:25:11 -0500 From: "John Mehr" Subject: Re: svn - but smaller? To: X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v5.3.11 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:25:11 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5167B78A.7070008@gmail.com> References: <5167B78A.7070008@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:25:18 -0000 On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:28:10 +0300  Markiyan Kushnir wrote: > ok, looks like the mere fix to the strlen() call as you >suggested earlier doesn't resolve the issue of CPU eating >up. > > On 12.04.2013 08:43, mrboco@gmail.com wrote: >> On Friday, April 12, 2013 1:09:53 AM UTC+6, Markiyan >>Kushnir wrote: >>>> Another thing that might be worth of attention, the >>>>patched version has >>>> been again back to slower checkout time: >>>> real    91m38.824s >>>> user    0m26.216s >>>> sys     0m13.858s >>>> at 4 Mbit/s link, while the original 0.56 takes ~55min >>>>given the same >>>> load/network conditions. >> >> You may just fix typo and not use other fixes. I doubt >>they actual for remote fetching. > > I agree that that long update is not a critical problem >per se. People would set up a cron job to run svnup >regularly and not be bothered with it. However it might >become an inconvenience if one wants to update sources >ad-hoc, as for example during solving an issue. The thing >is that the proper time to check out a full base/head at >4Mbit/s is 7.5 minutes. And a subsequent update of the >tree is proportional to the amount of changes between the >revisions, and is often a matter of seconds. It would be >nice to get comparable time from svnup. > > -- > Markiyan. > >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>"freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to >"freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > Hello, In the previous version (0.61), the process of checking file names against the list of known files in the repository was inefficient and most likely accounts for the slow down you're seeing.  I've reimplemented it using a binary search tree and the lookup phase is no longer a bottleneck.