On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 10:53:57AM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > David Roundy wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 03:26:09PM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > >> I just updated my darcs2 to try out the new ByteString changes and see if > >> I > >> could reproduce Erik's results, and I'm seeing a bit regression in the > >> performance of unpull: > > > > I'll try to take a look at this tomorrow... I've spent my darcs time for > > the day working out zooko's performance regression. Who knows, maybe I've > > fixed yours? :) > > I just updated and tried again, and now pull has regressed too, by an order > of magnitude :-(
Argh. That's odd, my testing (which is on a --hashed repository) suggests that pull still hasn't regressed, although I can reproduce your unpull regression. > You should be able to reproduce this pretty easily with a darcs2 ghc > repository. I get no progress messages at all from pull for quite a while, > and the 400-patch pull now takes over 100s where it previously took 10. > Unpull is also taking about 100s on this machine, where previously it took 15. Oddly enough in my quick darcs2-format test, I don't see the slowdown, but on the hashed-format test I do. This may be some sort of hysteresis effect. I'll try using your darcs2 repository, but first I want to debug the darcs get slowness (or at least lack of progress). :( -- David Roundy Department of Physics Oregon State University _______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel