Slow "bzr branch" on Savannah

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:04:04 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu.org>
> Cc: bazaar at lists.canonical.com
> 
> > Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:22:12 -0600
> > From: John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com>
> > CC: Eric Siegerman <lists08-bzr at davor.org>, bazaar at lists.canonical.com
> 
> I did some more measurements using the advice given.  To summarize:

No responses?  At least two people said they would be interested in
seeing these results.

Anyway, any conclusions from this, except that Savannah admins should
be urged to upgrade to bzr 2.2+?

Thanks.

>   . nosmart+ is a clear winner on Savannah, at least for the machine
>     that is on the same LAN -- it gives me the same time as with SFTP
>     (15 min)
> 
>   . a remote Windows machine is twice as fast with Launchpad (either
>     HTTP or bzr+ssh), which is as fast as SFTP was with Savannah
> 
>   . On Windows, nosmart+ with Savannah yields no improvement at all
> 
> Details below.  Any comments will be appreciated.
> 
> > On 2/8/2011 1:19 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > ...
> > 
> > > What does Launchpad know or do that bzr.savannah doesn't?
> > 
> > Use bzr 2.2+ rather than 2.0?
> 
> Given the results below, the time for bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/
> is almost the same as for bzr+ssh on Savannah, would you expect this
> to produce a significant improvement?  Maybe because of the LAN
> connection?
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > The detailed results are as follows:
> > > 
> > >   1) lp:emacs
> > > 
> > >      a) GNU/Linux:
> > > 
> > >         time:
> > > 
> > >           real    47m31.014s
> > >           user    16m31.510s
> > >           sys     0m14.000s
> > > 
> > >         network:
> > > 
> > >           Transferred: 675470KiB (237.1K/s r:675004K w:467K)
> > > 
> > >      b) Windows:
> > > 
> > >         time:
> > > 
> > >           real    01h04m01.629s
> > >           user    00h20m54.484s
> > >           sys     00h00m57.046s
> > > 
> > >         network:
> > > 
> > >           Transferred: 676975kB (176.3kB/s r:676479kB w:496kB)
> > 
> > I'm assuming you aren't logged in here, since you mention the 'HTTP'
> > debug messages later. So this is effectively:
> > 
> >   bzr branch http://bazaar.launchpad.net/...
> > 
> > I would certainly be curious about the times for:
> > 
> >   bzr branch bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/
> > 
> > But you would need an LP user id for that.
> 
> Thanks to Andrew's instructions, I now have them.  Here are the times:
> 
>   GNU/Linux:
> 
>     real    49m17.067s
>     user    14m36.890s
>     sys     0m14.250s
> 
>     Transferred: 591993KiB (200.3K/s r:591914K w:79K)
> 
>   Windows:
> 
>     real    01h10m09.873s
>     user    00h40m22.046s
>     sys     00h05m36.921s
> 
>     Transferred: 606200kB (144.1kB/s r:606120kB w:81kB)
> 
> Bottom line: no difference wrt http://.  Is this expected?
> 
> > >   2) bzr://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/emacs/trunk
> > > 
> > >      a) GNU/Linux:
> > > 
> > >         time:
> > > 
> > >           real    45m4.820s
> > >           user    15m58.380s
> > >           sys     0m12.910s
> > > 
> > >         network:
> > > 
> > >           Transferred: 540480KiB (199.9K/s r:540403K w:77K)
> > > 
> > >      b) Windows:
> > > 
> > >         time:
> > > 
> > >           real    02h13m52.949s
> > >           user    00h15m37.828s
> > >           sys     00h00m39.578s
> > > 
> > >         network:
> > > 
> > >           Transferred: 552961kB (68.9kB/s r:552882kB w:79kB)
> > 
> > This seems to be a latency thing. And from what you described it could
> > be something non-optimal about the "discovering revisions to fetch"
> > phase. There are a lot of pieces that could be involved:
> > [...]
> > 4) Something to check:
> > 
> >  bzr branch nosmart+bzr://...
> 
> Results:
> 
>   GNU/Linux
> 
>     real    16m30.189s
>     user    15m22.090s
>     sys     0m14.560s
> 
>     Transferred: 780914KiB (789.2K/s r:780640K w:275K)
> 
>   Windows:
> 
>     real    02h28m35.032s
>     user    00h20m36.921s
>     sys     00h00m50.750s
> 
>     Transferred: 799657kB (89.7kB/s r:799375kB w:282kB)
> 
> Bottom line: a dramatic improvement for GNU/Linux (but the machine
> sits on the same LAN as Savannah, remember?), and no change at all for
> a remote Windows machine.
> 
> > One other thing to try. Skip the 'init-repo' step. So rather than doing:
> > 
> > bzr init-repo test
> > cd test
> > bzr branch $SOURCE
> > 
> > Just do:
> > 
> > bzr branch $SOURCE test
> 
> Results:
> 
>   GNU/Linux, bzr://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/emacs/trunk
> 
>     real    30m23.956s
>     user    11m33.760s
>     sys     0m17.730s
> 
>     Transferred: 540873KiB (296.7K/s r:540872K w:2K)
> 
>   GNU/Linux, bzr+ssh://MYID@bzr.savannah.gnu.org/emacs/trunk
> 
>     real    44m22.455s
>     user    11m58.350s
>     sys     0m16.210s
> 
>     Transferred: 540873KiB (203.6K/s r:540871K w:2K)
> 
> On Windows, this method yields no difference from the one where I
> create a repo first.  On GNU/Linux, a small (30%) improvement for
> bzr://, and no improvement for bzr+ssh://.
> 
>