commit performance regression in 0.11
aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca
Mon Sep 25 21:14:25 BST 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> Well all of these start exposing "implementation details", right?
> Also, what do people think about trying to get my no-hash-prefix version
> of the repository into 0.12? I haven't been pushing for it, because we
> haven't tested it a whole lot. But it really is a lot faster for a new
> kernel-sized add + commit (like 1/2 the time). Since your Knit2 format
> is experimental, I think we could just put it in the same format, and
> then we don't have the overhead of 2 format changes.
I think it would be best to bump to Knit3, and just drop support for the
current Knit2. There's always the chance of confusion if we retain the
same format string.
> Another possibility would be to make the hash-prefix configurable with
> another control file. So people could decide which one they wanted to
> use, in case a given filesystem performed poorly.
I'd tend to go YAGNI on that.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the bazaar