non-recursive status of a directory?

Robert Collins robertc at
Tue Jun 10 12:53:55 BST 2008

On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 23:39 +1200, Talden wrote:
> On my most active branch with a 650MB working tree of 20,000 files in
> 3,600 folders I get 3 seconds on my NTFS formatted 7200rpm laptop
> hard-drive under WinXP if the folder is already cached - if it's not
> cached (or worse, python and bzr aren't yet cached) the time is > 10
> seconds.
> If delays to get any current icons are always 2+ seconds in explorer
> then I think that's too long.  Of course if the system is smart enough
> to keep bzr and python files in cache and keep and maintain status
> information in memory for a reasonable period after a first peek then
> perhaps this is less of a concern.

But if it takes 10 seconds to figure it out, thats how long it takes.

This is a boolean: either we know the answer, or we don't. And in the
common case we have to examine most of the entire tree (for any search
order we choose, 50% of the time the changed file will be in the last
half of the search).

We can't put 'unchanged' as a detail on a folder until we know it is, or
users may happily delete an altered folder *thinking it is unaltered*.

We can put a '?' up immediately of course and change that when we know

GPG key available at: <>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the bazaar mailing list