Received: from spf5.us4.outblaze.com (spf5.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.27]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iAIIbsxJ010882 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:37:55 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf5.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A829D77056 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:37:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CUrJE-0001lX-68 for migo@homemail.com; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:47:08 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CUrIo-0001iQ-7f for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:46:42 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CUrIn-0001iA-Hj for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:46:41 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CUrIn-0001i0-BW for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:46:41 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CUr8b-0003Iy-Ee for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:36:09 -0500 Received: from miles by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1CUr7I-0005yv-Td; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:34:48 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:34:48 -0500 To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: cacherev policy script Message-ID: <20041118183448.GA23898@fencepost> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Blat: Foop From: Miles Bader Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 1556 Lines: 36 On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 12:48:58PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > In 'Archive Cached Revisons' from > > , > > it talks says an optimal cacherev policy would be "cached revisions such > > that the sum of the sizes of changesets between any two cached revisions > > is about the same as the size as the [...] cached revision." > > > I'm just wondering if anyone has implemented a script to do this. > > Assuming cachedrev are mostly used to speed up the "initial checkout", and > assuming that initial checkouts are done in 99% of the cases on the latest > revision, the optimal policy might be to have a single cacherev, placed near > the latest revision. > This assumes you have the backbuilder, of course. It's very dependendent on other properties of the protocol though. When I (too rarely) make emacs cacherevs, I'm very careful to place them a fair number of revisions before the latest, because if I don't, someone using my tree to do _updates_ can get a cacherev, which is extremely horrible in the case of emacs. This problem would go away if tla used smarter algorithm to choose when to use cachrevs, of course... :-/ -Miles -- Come now, if we were really planning to harm you, would we be waiting here, beside the path, in the very darkest part of the forest? _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/