Re: Kernel SCM saga..

Martin Pool
2005-04-07T05:39:48Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1459 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 19:32 -0700, David Lang wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Martin Pool wrote:
>
> > I haven't tested importing all 60,000+ changesets of the current bk tree,
> > partly because I don't *have* all those changesets. (Larry said
> > previously that someone (not me) tried to pull all of them using bkclient,
> > and he considered this abuse and blacklisted them.)
>
> pull the patches from the BK2CVS server. yes some patches are combined,
> but it will get you in the ballpark.

OK, I just tried that. I know there are scripts to resynthesize
changesets from the CVS info but I skipped that for now and just pulled
each day's work into a separate bzr revision. It's up to the end of
March and still running.

Importing the first snapshot (2004-01-01) took 41.77s user, 1:23.79
total. Each subsequent day takes about 10s user, 30s elapsed to commit
into bzr. The speeds are comparable to CVS or a bit faster, and may be
faster than other distributed systems. (This on a laptop with a 5400rpm
disk.) Pulling out a complete copy of the tree as it was on a previous
date takes about 14 user, 60s elapsed.

I don't want to get too distracted by benchmarks now because there are
more urgent things to do and anyhow there is still lots of scope for
optimization. I wouldn't be at all surprised if those times could be
more than halved. I just wanted to show it is in (I hope) the right
ballpark.

--
Martin

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]