[Bug 257180] Re: slower performance of log and annotate in 1.6?

[Robert Collins]

On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 01:07 +0000, Martin Pool wrote:
> 
> It would be a shame to have this regression in 1.6.  It seems like one
> practical measure would be to restore the load of the whole index in
> this case, and at least see how that compares.  This would be a step
> back from the kind of index behaviour we generally want, but perhaps
> the best we can do for current pack indexes.  Perhaps we could do this
> through an api that is just a hint, and less specific than
> _buffer_all, so that other repositories can just ignore it.

I have repositories where doing this will OOM bzr :) I realise that they
are somewhat extreme :(.  I agree its not a desirable regression, but it
simply highlights the known deficiencies of 'graphindex' more.

-Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- 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 : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20080813/7bcd07e6/attachment.pgp