On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Ian Lynagh <ig...@earth.li> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:10:41PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 01:08:34PM -0700, Jason Dagit wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Ian Lynagh <ig...@earth.li> wrote: > > > > > > > $ darcs --version > > > > 1.0.9rc1 (release candidate 1) > > > > > > > > $ time darcs record -lam 'imported linux-2.6.31.1' +RTS -sstderr > > > > ... > > > > 39 Mb total memory in use > > > > > > > > > > Only 39Mb? That's less than the compressed patch, so I find it hard to > > > believe. > > > > If you're just concatenating all diffs into a patch, you don't need > > to have it all in memory at once. >
I finally found the bug I was thinking of: http://bugs.darcs.net/issue162 Quoting David: > Just to clarify here. We did at one time support lazy operation in record > (the > key was that you had to use --all, or specify 'a' at the beginning of the > interactive prompt), and it's possible to do so. However, somewhere along > the > way this feature broke, and I'm just as glad that it did. I don't like the > idea > of darcs creating patches that it can't hold in memory, as it *very* > severely > limits what you can do with them, and I'd rather our users don't get stuck > in a > situation where darcs has created a patch so big that it can't lift it. > Jason
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
