Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch commit on large trees ?

[Philippe Moutarlier]

Is that the only way to get decent speed ? Then I guess it is not an
option for us. 
The main interesting idea that I was trying to sell is the ability to do
remote software version management while not being connected to the
network. This is especially interesting for people on the road with
their laptops who could not afford to store revision libraries.

Philippe

 
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 20:29, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 19:23:42 -0700, Philippe Moutarlier wrote:
> 
> > Ok, sorry if this was brought up before. I tried to search the archive
> > but could not find answers to this.... 
> > 
> > I am new to tla/arch and trying to prove to people to my company that it
> > could be a cool idea instead of CVS. I just installed it and tried some
> > simple edit/commit on a quite large tree (i.e. same size as a full linux
> > kernel). 
> > 
> > I am using explicit tagging method on a local hard drive, even if a
> > laptop one.  Now my problem (and a show stopper for my company guys), is
> > the time it takes to compute the changes and/or commit them. It takes up
> > to 3 minutes before it even gets to the "update pristine tree" phase,
> > then you must add 1:30 minute to get the final "committed". 
> > 
> > This seems to be extremely slow compared to my experience of CVS on a
> > remote NFS mounted repository. Am I doing something wrong or is there a
> > way to improve this ? 
> 
> A revision library will improve the performance dramatically.
> 
> Anand
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-arch-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
> 
> GNU arch home page:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
>