bzr-explorer performance question

[Maritza Mendez]

Ok.  Thanks for all the great ideas.  I will try to get to them between
other tasks.

I will summarize some of my thoughts as additions to
Issue#582838<https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr-explorer/+bug/582838>and
open others if appropriate.

As has been said before, there appears to be both a bzrlib component to this
and bzr-explorer component.

To identify where the focus really belongs, I did the experiment again with
the same files, but this time with qbzr on the command line, without
bzr-explorer.  Here are the results:

bzr qinit SHARED_REPO  # pick shared repo & format 2a
cd SHARED_REPO
bzr qinit trunk  # pick stand-alone branch & format 2a -- uses shared repo
cd trunk
[copy all 300+ directories with 500+ files to trunk]
bzr qbrowse  # <1 second
bzr qadd
# immediate response: QTreeView::rowsInserted internal representation of the
model has been corrupted, resetting.
# 76 seconds to build list of files to add
# click "OK" to start the actual add
# 34 seconds to actually add files
# total time 76+34=110 seconds
bzr qbrowse  # < 1 second
bzr qcommit
# immediate response: QTreeView::rowsInserted internal representation of the
model has been corrupted, resetting.
#  37 seconds to build list of files to commit
#  click "OK" to start the actual commit
#  154 seconds to actually commit
# total time 37+154=191 seconds
bzr qbrowse  # 33 seconds
bzr qbrowse  # <2 seconds
bzr qbrowse  # <2 seconds

Three things deserve comment:

1. The QTreeView errors are interesting.
2. The first qbrowse is slower than subsequent runs, consistent with what we
see with 'bzr stat'
3. The qadd and qcommit seem to take longer than their pure bzrlib
counterparts

There's more to be learned from the details.  As I said, I need to think
just a little before I log this at launchpad.

~M
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20100629/fecb6ef3/attachment-0001.htm