Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:59:06 +0200 (EET)
From: Miika Komu <miika@iki.fi>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees
In-Reply-To: <tnxu0qfd42s.fsf@arm.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0412212355080.22764@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0412211013550.13159@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi>
	<tnxu0qfd42s.fsf@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
Precedence: list
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: 947
Lines: 27
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> Miika Komu <miika@iki.fi> writes:
> > Our project (*) uses tla for storing a complete, modified linux kernel.
> > tla 1.2 is far too slow for e.g. commits and listing changes with the
> > configuration we use. Just yesterday I did a commit that finished in 15
> > minutes even with revision libraries (greedy+sparse).
>
> What machine are you using? Do you work over NFS?

AMD Athlon XP 1700+ with an IDE disk. No, I don't use NFS (at least
commits don't work with tla-1.2 on NFS).

Thanks for the tips! So, I guess hard linking to revlib is currently the
only way to really speed up tla with large trees?

-- 
Miika Komu              miika@iki.fi          http://www.iki.fi/miika/


_______________________________________________
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/