[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization |
Date: |
Tue, 16 Sep 2003 09:18:48 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
[re: inode signature optimizations]
> ... it seems to stop working after you use `replay' or `update',
> presumably because the current latest revision no longer has an entry
> in ,,inode-sigs (even though almost nothing will have changed).
Oops. Yup, I'll fix that. It's a few days work, though. Wouldn't
hurt to file it as a bug if you haven't already.
> From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
> I wrote:
> > Some idea for solving it --
> > (1) Have replay/update/whatever update ,,inode-sigs;
> > (2) Don't keep per-revision state at all, just keep single per-version
> > state-file in ,,inode-sigs.
> Oh, wait, I was confused. (2) doesn't make any sense [....]
> so I guess it's gotta be (1)...
Heh. Yes, it has to be (1). If you want some fun, try to imagine how
you do that for `replay', though. Don't forget that there may be
local changes already when the `replay' starts.
Update's not nearly so bad if you don't mind tossing in an extra
tree-traversal just before local changes are reapplied to the tree --
the tree is known to be equal to a particular revision at that point.
Hint: no, you can't keep around "stale" entries from the ancestor
revision's ,,inode-sig file. A user might revert some changes in a
manner that makes the stale entry into an invalid entry that will fool
`commit'.
> Bloat's still an issue though, so it seems as if it should be pruning
> these things after a while, perhaps in conjunction with the associated
> pristine tree.
They are already pruned, in a simple-minded way. Only the five most
recent ,,inode-sigs files are kept for each tree.
-t
- [Gnu-arch-users] problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization, Miles Bader, 2003/09/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization, David Brown, 2003/09/16
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization, Miles Bader, 2003/09/16
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization, Miles Bader, 2003/09/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] problem with ,,inode-sigs optimization,
Tom Lord <=