On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Which _shell_ you were using had an impact? I can see how the terminal
> emulator in use, the $TERM value, etc would have an impact... but why
> does the identity of svn's parent process have any effect?
Yes, the underlying terminal emulato
Justin Erenkrantz wrote on Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 06:20:41 -0400:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> > But more to the point: anybody have a solution in mind? If it's not
> > Windows-only then some Windows defines wont help of course. Buffering
> > the output may be the only
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 30.08.2012 13:02, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> > But won't the output thread then take just as long, so the user still
> > has to wait until that is finished? There is not much point (from the
> > users perspective) in having the checkout fini
On 30.08.2012 13:02, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> But won't the output thread then take just as long, so the user still
> has to wait until that is finished? There is not much point (from the
> users perspective) in having the checkout finished after 25 minutes,
> if the output still keeps coming in fo
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> But more to the point: anybody have a solution in mind? If it's not
>> Windows-only then some Windows defines wont help of course. Buffering
>> the output may be the only way to
On 30.08.2012 12:20, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Another approach is to split out the notification writes to a
> different thread...it'd stop the blockage issue. Fun...but, I don't
> think we're using threading anywhere in the client right now...
Sure, but there's nothing preventing us from having
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann
wrote:
> On 8/30/12, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn
>>> wrote:
Yep, redirecting to a file eliminates the bottleneck (almost the sam
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> But more to the point: anybody have a solution in mind? If it's not
> Windows-only then some Windows defines wont help of course. Buffering
> the output may be the only way to eliminate this bottleneck? What are
> the pros and cons, and how
On 8/30/12, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn
>> wrote:
>>> Yep, redirecting to a file eliminates the bottleneck (almost the same
>>> as redirecting to NUL) (I ran it a couple of times to make
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 30.08.2012 09:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 09:11:08 +0200:
>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>
On 30.08.2012 09:40, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 09:11:08 +0200:
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
Yep, redirecting to a file eliminates the bottleneck (almost t
Johan Corveleyn wrote on Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 09:11:08 +0200:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> >> Yep, redirecting to a file eliminates the bottleneck (almost the same
> >> as redirecting to NUL) (I ran it
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> Yep, redirecting to a file eliminates the bottleneck (almost the same
>> as redirecting to NUL) (I ran it a couple of times to make sure the
>> server cache was hot):
>
> FWIW, I
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> Yep, redirecting to a file eliminates the bottleneck (almost the same
> as redirecting to NUL) (I ran it a couple of times to make sure the
> server cache was hot):
FWIW, I've historically seen similar behavior on Unix platforms as
well -
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
>> [[[
>> C:\Temp\svnperf>timeit svn export https://playsvn/repos export1
>> ... snip output ...
>> start: 2012-29-08 00:48:49,06
>> end : 2012-29-08 00:53:29,07
>> total runtime: 28
t;> wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>>> >>> -Original Message-
>>> >>> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
>>> >>> Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
>>> >>>
>>> -Original Message-
>> >>> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
>> >>> Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
>> >>> To: Subversion Development
>> >>> Subject: notification output bottleneck
>> >>>
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Ivan Zhakov [mailto:i...@visualsvn.com]
> Sent: woensdag 29 augustus 2012 00:47
> To: Johan Corveleyn
> Cc: Bert Huijben; Subversion Development
> Subject: Re: notification output bottleneck
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:00 AM,
gt;>> Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
>>>> To: Subversion Development
>>>> Subject: notification output bottleneck
>>>>
>>>> I've never noticed this before (slow server, but now I'm testing a new,
>>> faster
>>>&
com]
> >>> Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
> >>> To: Subversion Development
> >>> Subject: notification output bottleneck
> >>>
> >>> I've never noticed this before (slow server, but now I'm testing a new,
> >> fa
n Development
>>> Subject: notification output bottleneck
>>>
>>> I've never noticed this before (slow server, but now I'm testing a new,
>> faster
>>> server), but it seems that the writing of notification output on stdout is
>> a
>>&g
Bert Huijben wrote on Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 02:09:07 +0200:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
> > To: Subversion Development
> > Subject: notification output bottleneck
> >
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
>> To: Subversion Development
>> Subject: notification output bottleneck
>>
>> I
> -Original Message-
> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: maandag 27 augustus 2012 00:39
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: notification output bottleneck
>
> I've never noticed this before (slow server, but now I'm testing a new,
I've never noticed this before (slow server, but now I'm testing a
new, faster server), but it seems that the writing of notification
output on stdout is a bottleneck for checkout, update or export on
Windows (cmd.exe). With a fast server, hot caches, and everything on a
Gb LAN, checkout of a large
25 matches
Mail list logo
