[darcs-users] Re: fptools in darcs now available

[Daan Leijen]

>>>The memory usage is way worse than that of tar, but I'm optimistic that
>>>we can improve things a bit in that realm.  Perhaps (for example) by
>>>storing PackedString file paths, or by making the directory-reading portion
>>>of slurp lazy.  In any case, 450M isn't such bad maximum memory consumption
>>>for a project the size of the kernel.
>>
>>Memory use shouldn't be anywhere near that. Do you have the patch to
>>make the test not hang on to the patch (can't remember if that's in d-u
>>yet)?
>>
>>If not, you can instead give --no-test to record.
> 
> 
> You're right.  I'm using a somewhat older version of darcs-unstable for
> which I happen to have a binary here at work.  Giving --no-test does indeed
> keep the memory usage down below 10M.  It also speeds up the result to less
> than four times slower than tar in terms of wallclock times, and maybe six
> or seven times the CPU time.

Two thumbs up! Great work David and Ian!!

-- Daan Leijen.