cvs2arch (was Re: [Gnu-arch-users] an hack.. one night long)

[wave++]

(the old subject may not catch enough attention ;))

I wrote:
> Another point is speed. While continuosly committing, tla slows down
> considerably. I know you can archive-cache, but this may be a problem (even
> space-wise).

I modified a bit cvs2arch to produce some stats about the conversion in
progress.

  http://www.yuv.info/~wavexx/hacks/cvs2arch-perf.png

I managed to place all useful informations in the same graph.
We have:

  red: the time (in milliseconds) needed to update source using cvs.
  green: the time needed by tla to commit the tree.
  blue: the size (in kilobytes) of the whole arch working tree (includes
        {arch} size).
  magenta: the size of the sources (same as blue, but without {arch}).

On X we have the current pachset being worked on.

As we see, cvs times tend to descend. This is probably thanks to the
reversed patch format that RCS uses. tla instead tends to take a time
that's roughly linear to the patchset number (not really affected by the
sources: note the spike at patchset #50).

arch @ patch 280 is roughly 8 times slower than arch @ patch 5 in this
case.

-- 
'(wave++ "Yuri D'Elia" "http://www.yuv.info/";)