Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 11:11 +0200, Florian Festi wrote:
Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 13:22 +0200, Florian Festi wrote:
* TransactionData.relatedto and .depends_on converted to sets
Should be fine. This is the sort of thing that becomes a lot easier to
integrate with separated out patchsets :)
Ok, this also contains a small speed up for .getMembers() but it should be a
bit smaller than the original patch...
Applied the getMembers() change. After thinking a little more, I wonder
if we want to define an AppendableSet and use that for depends_on and
related_to. At the same time, I can't find anything directly modifying
them so we're probably okay avoiding that overhead. Any other opinions?
Jeremy
The code looks quite unfinished (removes of transaction members are not
honored, not all relations are added) so I doubt it is used anywhere (except
in the SortableTransactionData). I also don't see any reason why someone
else than the resolver should add relations and why they shouldn't use
.setAsDep().
The change doesn't affect the performance of smaller operations at all. But
for an full install the lists use up 400 of 1000 seconds IIRC.
Florian
_______________________________________________
Yum-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
