Emacs Bazaar Repository II

Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Jason Earl]

I have created a second Emacs Bazaar repository at:

bzr://bzr.notengoamigos.org/emacs-merges/

This repository was created (using a slightly modified fastimport
plugin) from Andreas Schwab's git repository at:

git://repo.or.cz/emacs

The advantage of this repository over the one that I created before is
that this repository has merge information.  It also has *most* of the
tag information (I am not sure what happened to the rest, I am looking
into it).

For information on how to use this repository, including links to
pre-made shared repositories, see:

http://bzr.notengoamigos.org/

If you want to just skip the instructions and check out the trunk from
this new repository you can do this:

bzr clone http://bzr.notengoamigos.org/emacs-merges/trunk/ emacs-merges

That's not recommended, but it should work :).

I am sending this to the bazaar mailing list as well so that they can
have a heads up.

Jason Earl

Here's my disclaimer:

These repositories are not official (although they do mirror the
official CVS repository), and they don't even represent a "best effort"
conversion to Bazaar.  Both the existing "emacs" repository and the new
"emacs-merges" repository have problems, and could not be used "as is"
as part of a migration to Bazaar.  I am not a part of the Emacs
development team or the Bazaar development team.  I'm just some random
guy on the Internet that likes playing with version control systems.

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Martin Pool]

On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Jason Earl <jearl@notengoamigos.org> wrote:
>
> I have created a second Emacs Bazaar repository at:
>
> bzr://bzr.notengoamigos.org/emacs-merges/

Thanks for that.  We'd be interested to hear how this performs with
emacs in general development use: is it fast enough, or what would you
most like improved?   And are there any bugs that you hit in
particular when using bzr with emacs?

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Daniel Clemente]

"Martin Pool" <mbp@canonical.com> writes:
>
> Thanks for that.  We'd be interested to hear how this performs with
> emacs in general development use: is it fast enough, or what would you
> most like improved?   And are there any bugs that you hit in
> particular when using bzr with emacs?

  I speak as a simple user who likes to see what's going on in Emacs. I am hoping that Emacs can migrate to Bazaar soon because Cvs or Git are too complex for me to use and therefore hinder me from collaborating (it was not the case with Bazaar).

  The operation I use most is „log“: to see what's new, or if something was included or not, or when, or who did what when, etc.
  I have tested this second repository and also the first one. I used today's bzr (rev. 3788) and did several successive tests until the results stabilised.


The old one (without merges):
-----------------------------

$ time ../bzr/bzr log >/dev/null

real	3m10.266s
user	2m57.083s
sys	0m2.004s


The new one (emacs-merges):
---------------------------

$ time ../bzr/bzr log >/dev/null

real	4m20.742s
user	4m10.092s
sys	0m2.420s


  Ok, with merges it's 1m10s more than without merges.
  However, ¿¿¿ 4m20s only to display log messages ??? That seems a lot, specially after seeing how fast can log messages be shown in other tools: here is the result for the same tree in git:

$ time git log >/dev/null

real	0m7.849s
user	0m6.940s
sys	0m0.208s


  So, having to wait 4m20s where you could be waiting 8s means that there is still room for improvement and that yes, it still is a bit uncomfortable.
  But all problems will be solved...


  Greetings,

Daniel



PS:
  The repositories I used for the tests are:
http://bzr.notengoamigos.org/emacs/trunk/
bzr://bzr.notengoamigos.org/emacs-merges/trunk/
git://git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 617 bytes --]

Hi,

Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs@yahoo.com>:

>   The operation I use most is „log“: to see what's new, or if
> something was included or not, or when, or who did what when, etc. I
> have tested this second repository and also the first one. I used
> today's bzr (rev. 3788) and did several successive tests until the
> results stabilised.

 Which bzr version are you using?  1.8 improved log performance
according to the release notes.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Jason Earl]

Christian Faulhammer <opfer@gentoo.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs@yahoo.com>:
>
>>   The operation I use most is „log“: to see what's new, or if
>> something was included or not, or when, or who did what when, etc. I
>> have tested this second repository and also the first one. I used
>> today's bzr (rev. 3788) and did several successive tests until the
>> results stabilised.
>
>  Which bzr version are you using?  1.8 improved log performance
> according to the release notes.
>
> V-Li

I'm using bzr.dev and I get similar numbers for trunk on the emacs
repository.  Of course, this is on an underpowered laptop, but I still
have a hard time waiting over a minute for log information.

time bzr log > /dev/null

real    2m7.347s
user    1m52.223s
sys     0m1.152s

Even worse, just getting the last 10 revisions is also ridiculously
slow.

time bzr log -r -10.. > /dev/null 

real    1m5.250s
user    0m59.520s
sys     0m0.320s

I didn't want to pile on with this particular complaint, as I know that
it has been brought up before, but bzr log is really really slow on
repositories with as many revisions as Emacs has.

I really like bzr's log output, as it makes the branch merging very
clear, but I really wish I knew of a sensible way to just get the last
few changes on a branch.

Jason Earl

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jason Earl wrote:
> Christian Faulhammer <opfer@gentoo.org> writes:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs@yahoo.com>:
>>
>>>   The operation I use most is „log“: to see what's new, or if
>>> something was included or not, or when, or who did what when, etc. I
>>> have tested this second repository and also the first one. I used
>>> today's bzr (rev. 3788) and did several successive tests until the
>>> results stabilised.
>>  Which bzr version are you using?  1.8 improved log performance
>> according to the release notes.
>>
>> V-Li
> 
> I'm using bzr.dev and I get similar numbers for trunk on the emacs
> repository.  Of course, this is on an underpowered laptop, but I still
> have a hard time waiting over a minute for log information.
> 
> time bzr log > /dev/null
> 
> real    2m7.347s
> user    1m52.223s
> sys     0m1.152s
> 
> Even worse, just getting the last 10 revisions is also ridiculously
> slow.
> 
> time bzr log -r -10.. > /dev/null 
> 
> real    1m5.250s
> user    0m59.520s
> sys     0m0.320s
> 
> I didn't want to pile on with this particular complaint, as I know that
> it has been brought up before, but bzr log is really really slow on
> repositories with as many revisions as Emacs has.
> 
> I really like bzr's log output, as it makes the branch merging very
> clear, but I really wish I knew of a sensible way to just get the last
> few changes on a branch.
> 
> Jason Earl
> 
> 

Try "bzr log --short -r -10..-1 >/dev/null"

It should be surprisingly faster. I've been working with Vincent a
little bit to try and make our log layout and numbering not require
reading the whole ancestry.

Also, you might try using "--development2" format. At least if you want
to see an interesting comparison. Specifically, --development2 changes
the index format, which makes certain parts of "load-the-whole-ancestry"
perform a lot better. Obviously the best fix is to get rid of the
O(ancsetry) operation, but you can do some things to mitigate it in the
short term.

(With a recent bzr.dev or I believe bzr-1.8, you should be able to copy
your existing repository and just "bzr upgrade --development2")

If you are willing to do it, it would be interesting to see the result.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkj/lXYACgkQJdeBCYSNAAO4igCfYOT9nBA/2yQjWpII+7LN/Z8m
SZoAnjMlNZASBVBemVhbYOiwaxGouluQ
=5sYA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Daniel Clemente]

Christian Faulhammer <opfer@gentoo.org> writes:

>  Which bzr version are you using?  1.8 improved log performance
> according to the release notes.
>

  It's strange, but I get very similar speeds for „bzr log >/dev/null“ with bzr 1.5 (the one from Debian unstable) and yesterday's bzr.dev (revision 3788, it's 1.9dev).
  Both take between 4m20s and 4m50s; neither seems faster than the other.

--
Daniel

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Jason Earl]

John Arbash Meinel <john@arbash-meinel.com> writes:

> Jason Earl wrote:
>> Christian Faulhammer <opfer@gentoo.org> writes:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs@yahoo.com>:
>>>
>>>>   The operation I use most is „log“: to see what's new, or if
>>>> something was included or not, or when, or who did what when, etc. I
>>>> have tested this second repository and also the first one. I used
>>>> today's bzr (rev. 3788) and did several successive tests until the
>>>> results stabilised.
>>>  Which bzr version are you using?  1.8 improved log performance
>>> according to the release notes.
>>>
>>> V-Li
>> 
>> I'm using bzr.dev and I get similar numbers for trunk on the emacs
>> repository.  Of course, this is on an underpowered laptop, but I still
>> have a hard time waiting over a minute for log information.
>> 
>> time bzr log > /dev/null
>> 
>> real    2m7.347s
>> user    1m52.223s
>> sys     0m1.152s
>> 
>> Even worse, just getting the last 10 revisions is also ridiculously
>> slow.
>> 
>> time bzr log -r -10.. > /dev/null 
>> 
>> real    1m5.250s
>> user    0m59.520s
>> sys     0m0.320s
>> 
>> I didn't want to pile on with this particular complaint, as I know that
>> it has been brought up before, but bzr log is really really slow on
>> repositories with as many revisions as Emacs has.
>> 
>> I really like bzr's log output, as it makes the branch merging very
>> clear, but I really wish I knew of a sensible way to just get the last
>> few changes on a branch.
>> 
>> Jason Earl
>> 
>> 
>
> Try "bzr log --short -r -10..-1 >/dev/null"

Oh yeah, that's the stuff.  That finished in less than a second.  More
importantly (to me anyway) straight bzr log --short starts spitting out
information to the console immediately.  Now I can do

bzr log --short | less

And see the most recent changes instantly.  I think that it is time for
me to create an alias.  The command still takes a while to finish (1m28s
on my crappy laptop), but I don't care, because the bits I want appear
immediately.

> It should be surprisingly faster. I've been working with Vincent a
> little bit to try and make our log layout and numbering not require
> reading the whole ancestry.

--short is a lot better.  I miss the fancier layout a little, but not
enough to want to go back to waiting 2 minutes.

> Also, you might try using "--development2" format. At least if you want
> to see an interesting comparison. Specifically, --development2 changes
> the index format, which makes certain parts of "load-the-whole-ancestry"
> perform a lot better. Obviously the best fix is to get rid of the
> O(ancsetry) operation, but you can do some things to mitigate it in the
> short term.

Actually, the repository I am testing is already in development2 format.

jearl@jearl-laptop:~/projects/emacs/trunk$ bzr info
Repository branch (format: development2)
Location:
  shared repository: /home/jearl/projects/emacs
  repository branch: .

Related branches:
  parent branch: bzr://bzr.notengoamigos.org/emacs/trunk/

I probably should have mentioned that when I forwarded my "benchmarks",
but to be honest, I forgot that I had upgraded :).

> (With a recent bzr.dev or I believe bzr-1.8, you should be able to copy
> your existing repository and just "bzr upgrade --development2")

I updated my bzr to the most recent bzr.dev before testing.  I'd
forgotten that I had already updated the repository format, but I've
been using bzr long enough to know that a lot of progress has been made
in a ridiculously short time.  If your version of bzr is even a month
old then you are basically using a relic :).

> If you are willing to do it, it would be interesting to see the
> result.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure my original benchmarks included your
improvements.  The normal log command is painfully slow on the emacs
repository.  Even worse, it doesn't even start spitting out text
forever.  When using the --short flag it still takes over a minute, but
since there is output immediately it doesn't seem bad at all.

Jason Earl

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jason Earl wrote:
>> Try "bzr log --short -r -10..-1 >/dev/null"
> 
> bzr log --short starts spitting out
> information to the console immediately.  Now I can do
> 
> bzr log --short | less
> 
> And see the most recent changes instantly.  I think that it is time for
> me to create an alias.

You can also set the log_format configuration option in bazaar.conf.
This affects more commands than just log.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkj/pioACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI2b2gCfXcnKhDXjqHhhkxPo5lRR90tA
z9AAnjUOlbvJ0psnCfgwXYAOuwWNz2ya
=58Uj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Daniel Clemente wrote:
> Christian Faulhammer <opfer@gentoo.org> writes:
> 
>>  Which bzr version are you using?  1.8 improved log performance
>> according to the release notes.
>>
> 
>   It's strange, but I get very similar speeds for „bzr log >/dev/null“ with bzr 1.5 (the one from Debian unstable) and yesterday's bzr.dev (revision 3788, it's 1.9dev).
>   Both take between 4m20s and 4m50s; neither seems faster than the other.
> 
> --
> Daniel

I think the big changes are to "bzr log --short".

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkkAiVsACgkQJdeBCYSNAAMTPgCeIY2WUnOFM69KSa80FvWrTxDG
ez0AoLCMNOhWN7OlBFTlROQFM/hiJXgK
=qxKj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Daniel Clemente]

John Arbash Meinel <john@arbash-meinel.com> writes:

>
> (With a recent bzr.dev or I believe bzr-1.8, you should be able to copy
> your existing repository and just "bzr upgrade --development2")
>
> If you are willing to do it, it would be interesting to see the result.
>

Comparison of „time bzr log >/dev/null“ of emacs-merges:

With repository format: pack-0.92
log: 4m 20s
log --short: 3m 17s

With repository format: development2
log: 3m 4s
log --short: 2m 10s

git: 0m 7s

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs@yahoo.com>
> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:33:23 +0100
> Cc: bazaar@lists.canonical.com
> 
> Comparison of „time bzr log >/dev/null“ of emacs-merges:
> 
> With repository format: pack-0.92
> log: 4m 20s
> log --short: 3m 17s
> 
> With repository format: development2
> log: 3m 4s
> log --short: 2m 10s
> 
> git: 0m 7s

It is meaningless to time a command whose main output is redirected to
the null device, because a clever program could simply do nothing in
that case.  (I have no idea whether git does that.)

The `log' command exists to produce output, so please either time it
when it outputs to the screen or redirect to a real file, because
that's the practical use-case that should be of interest.

TIA

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Mathias Megyei]

On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 21:37 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs@yahoo.com>
> > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:33:23 +0100
> > Cc: bazaar@lists.canonical.com
> > 
> > Comparison of „time bzr log >/dev/null“ of emacs-merges:
> > 
> > With repository format: pack-0.92
> > log: 4m 20s
> > log --short: 3m 17s
> > 
> > With repository format: development2
> > log: 3m 4s
> > log --short: 2m 10s
> > 
> > git: 0m 7s
> 
> It is meaningless to time a command whose main output is redirected to
> the null device, because a clever program could simply do nothing in
> that case.  (I have no idea whether git does that.)
> 
> The `log' command exists to produce output, so please either time it
> when it outputs to the screen or redirect to a real file, because
> that's the practical use-case that should be of interest.

Git instantly displays the first page with the most recent
(and most interesting) commits:

 time git log -5
commit 606f8f94cc6288532d7fee9349ac4da98a9ac34b
Author: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Oct 23 13:46:17 2008 +0000

    Update.

.....

real	0m0.346s
user	0m0.000s
sys	0m0.020s

(Measured with "cold" cache on a Laptop 
 with Intel Core2duo U7500  @ 1.06GHz)

So in case of Git the first page is shown in practical use-cases in
less than 1s.
I have no idea whether Bzr is able to show the first commits while
computing the others in background.

Best Regards,

Mathias

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Robert Collins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 514 bytes --]

On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 18:33 +0100, Daniel Clemente wrote:
> 
> Comparison of „time bzr log >/dev/null“ of emacs-merges:
> 
> With repository format: pack-0.92
> log: 4m 20s
> log --short: 3m 17s
> 
> With repository format: development2
> log: 3m 4s
> log --short: 2m 10s

So, a significant improvement.

> git: 0m 7s

Truely, thats pretty fast. I'd like to know if its outputting the same
number of revisions.

-Rob


-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Emacs Bazaar Repository II

[Andreas Schwab]

Robert Collins <robertc@robertcollins.net> writes:

> On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 18:33 +0100, Daniel Clemente wrote:
>> 
>> git: 0m 7s
>
> Truely, thats pretty fast. I'd like to know if its outputting the same
> number of revisions.

$ git rev-list HEAD | wc -l
98978
$ time git log | wc -l
754882
4.841user 0.811system 0m5.570selapsed 100.00%CPU

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."