On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Daniel Pittman wrote:
> Er, can't we just use (or reimplement) require, so we load all
> libraries on disk that we have not already loaded in this case? It
> shouldn't be very many lines of code...
I agree, but I think the above fix is an appropriate fix for a re
Er, can't we just use (or reimplement) require, so we load all
libraries on disk that we have not already loaded in this case? It
shouldn't be very many lines of code...
Daniel
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 14:11, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> So, the thing I wanted to make sure people were aware of was that
So, the thing I wanted to make sure people were aware of was that it's
"load _everything_ (including the things that were already found) if
we're missing _anything_". The solution "works", it just had a
performance characteristic that I wanted to make sure people were aware
of.
--
Jacob Helwig
If the load-if-missing solution that you implemented last isn't working, I'd go
back to the old model of loading everything every time.
FTR, the reason we moved away from that because people complained about the
slowness. :)
On Apr 13, 2011, at 1:58 PM, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> After talking with
After talking with Nigel in person, we sorted out that #7075 is actually
a duplicate of #7039, and the version of the patch that has already been
merged in addresses both tickets.
That said, I still wanted to open up discussion, and get feedback on
which performance profile we'd like with regards
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Jacob Helwig wrote:
> Instead of always grabbing the full set of facts and only grabbing
> those we're interested in, we attempt to look up every fact by the
> "normal" means of "fact name == containing file name", and only fall
> back to loading all of the facts i
Instead of always grabbing the full set of facts and only grabbing
those we're interested in, we attempt to look up every fact by the
"normal" means of "fact name == containing file name", and only fall
back to loading all of the facts if this fails to find any of the
facts we're looking for.
Pair
