On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:13 AM, C. Michael Pilato <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, I just made switch slower yesterday, and knowingly so. At least, I > made it do some extra up-front work to verify that the switch isn't > potentially unwanted. My changes won't affect the time spent doing the > actual work of the switch (and you can pass --ignore-ancestry if you know > what you're doing and skip my extra logic altogether). These tests were via ra_local and pre-date your change. Plus the problem I am saying we should look into would have been created in 1.6. -- Thanks Mark Phippard http://markphip.blogspot.com/
