From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jan 31 01:20:10 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id BAA11540 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 31 Jan 1995 01:20:10 -0800
Received: from ibp.ibp.fr (ibp.ibp.fr [132.227.60.30]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA11427; Tue, 31 Jan 1995 01:18:43 -0800
Received: from blaise.ibp.fr (blaise.ibp.fr [132.227.60.1])
	by ibp.ibp.fr (8.6.8/jtpda-5.0) with SMTP id KAA05570
	; Tue, 31 Jan 1995 10:17:35 +0100
Received: by blaise.ibp.fr (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA04063; Tue, 31 Jan 95 10:15:29 +0100
From: roberto@blaise.ibp.fr (Ollivier ROBERT)
Message-Id: <9501310915.AA04063@blaise.ibp.fr>
Subject: Re: Optimizing CVS?
To: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 10:15:29 +0100 (MET)
Cc: hackers@freefall.cdrom.com
In-Reply-To: <199501310409.UAA23995@freefall.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 30, 95 08:09:14 pm
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 2.1.0-Development ctm#307
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23beta2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 748       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I would have to say that by this point, waiting around for CVS operations
> has taken a significant part of my life for the last 2 years.  It's
> great, I love it, but damn is it SLOW! :-(  Anyone out there closer to
> the CVS project who could say whether or not thoughts have been straying
> to optimization issues now?

Maybe we should optimize stat(2) before... Ask Remy about the tests
he made between ext2fs and our ffs. Our stat(2) is way slower than the
1.1.5.1 one.

When I used CVS under 1.1.5.1 it was very acceptable. Now, when I
do a cvs update on directories like lib/libc, it is slow.
-- 
Ollivier ROBERT     -=- The daemon is FREE! -=-     roberto@FreeBSD.ORG
   FreeBSD keltia 2.1.0-Development #18: Thu Jan 26 22:22:16 MET 1995