[darcs-users] Re: darcs for /etc very slow

Mark Stosberg mark at summersault.com
Thu Dec 16 01:08:36 UTC 2004


On 2004-12-16, David Roundy <droundy at abridgegame.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 08:55:24PM +0100, Karel Gardas wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, Phil Frost wrote:
>> > I have encountered times where 'darcs record' takes hours before I
>> > interrupt it, but 'darcs record -a' works in under 30 s. Saying 'a' in
>> > the interactive prompt is aparently not the same as the '-a' option.
>> 
>> You are right! I've seen also the same behaviour, but haven't tried to
>> debug it more...
>
> It's because when run interactively darcs sorts the changes, which it
> doesn't bother with when run with --all.  The sorting unfortunately is an
> O(N^2) operation.  We can't use an O(NlogN) sort because reordering patches
> in general requires commutation.  

Isn't there another option, like sorting strictly by the date fields? 
Or even doing something really easy (but possibly wrong), like using the
on-disk modifications times? 

It's nice to present them in some 'ideal' order, but presenting them in
/any/ order in a reasonable amount of time seems preferable to
presenting them in an ideal order in an extremely long amount of time.

    Mark

-- 
http://mark.stosberg.com/ 





More information about the darcs-users mailing list