On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 10:07 -0400, Zdenek Pavlas wrote:
> > Does it not spam different files so often that it's hard to read?
>
> Yeah, it does :) It looks pretty on first sight, but I have
> been using it for 1 day and it's somewhat annoying already.
> About 1s per file (the last commit) seems
> Does it not spam different files so often that it's hard to read?
Yeah, it does :) It looks pretty on first sight, but I have
been using it for 1 day and it's somewhat annoying already.
About 1s per file (the last commit) seems to be much better.
> I know one of the things we'd talked about
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 14:51 +0200, Zdeněk Pavlas wrote:
> Updates arrive evenly to all active files, but we check their timestamps
> against shared last_update_time. When we get past that check, the 'meter'
> argument to MultiFileMeter._do_update_meter() is meaningless.
>
> This patch cycles 'met
Updates arrive evenly to all active files, but we check their timestamps
against shared last_update_time. When we get past that check, the 'meter'
argument to MultiFileMeter._do_update_meter() is meaningless.
This patch cycles 'meter' through all active child meter objects.
This seems to give muc
