From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Berman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: vc-print-log vs. bzr log Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:56:50 +0200 Message-ID: <878vcbcp1p.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> References: <87ipbfcu4o.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1347721023 25086 80.91.229.3 (15 Sep 2012 14:57:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 14:57:03 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 15 16:57:07 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TCtnq-0003Be-5B for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:57:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39577 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCtnm-0006Mb-Ct for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2012 10:56:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33729) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCtnj-0006MW-HD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2012 10:56:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCtni-00014G-AE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2012 10:56:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]:37161) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TCtni-000149-0j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2012 10:56:54 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2012 14:56:51 -0000 Original-Received: from i59F54D73.versanet.de (EHLO rosalinde.fritz.box) [89.245.77.115] by mail.gmx.net (mp017) with SMTP; 15 Sep 2012 16:56:51 +0200 X-Authenticated: #20778731 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/DIYdo7oLD5WJCwkQUVddBgdhlzz9Zu1Vd8bav73 ChOR8/M0Sv5kvk In-Reply-To: (Andreas Schwab's message of "Sat, 15 Sep 2012 15:37:13 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 213.165.64.23 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153325 Archived-At: On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 15:37:13 +0200 Andreas Schwab w= rote: > Stephen Berman writes: > >> When I'm visiting a file on a local branch of the Emacs bzr trunk and >> type `M-! bzr log -r-1 RET' I see the log entry in less than one second. > > Try again passing the file name. Does it make a difference? Somewhat; see below. On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:51:33 +0300 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Stephen Berman >> Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 15:07:03 +0200 >>=20 >> When I'm visiting a file on a local branch of the Emacs bzr trunk and >> type `M-! bzr log -r-1 RET' I see the log entry in less than one second. >> When I type `C-x v l RET RET' =C2=B119 seconds elapse before the log is >> displayed (and the lag time is the same if I limit the display to one >> entry). Is this time difference expected? > > Yes, to some degree, because these two commands do 2 different things. > The first one shows the last commit in the branch. The second one > shows the commits only to the file you are visiting, which means > digging deeper into the version history. I understand that, but =C2=B119 seconds vs <1 second? Is that the best VC can do? > However, even if the file you are visiting is the one modified by the > last revision, bzr is slower when a file argument is passed.=20=20 I see this too, but it's still very much quicker than VC. Here are some timing tests, with emacs -Q: >From /data/steve/bzr/emacs/quickfixes/ typing `M-! time bzr log -r-1': real 0m0.428s user 0m0.305s sys 0m0.053s >From outside of this branch typing `M-! time bzr log -r-1 /data/steve/bzr/emacs/quickfixes/': real 0m0.484s user 0m0.323s sys 0m0.044s >From outside of this branch typing `M-! time bzr log -r-1 /data/steve/bzr/emacs/quickfixes/lisp/': real 0m1.330s user 0m0.957s sys 0m0.106s >From outside of this branch typing `M-! time bzr log -r-1 /data/steve/bzr/emacs/quickfixes/lisp/gnus/: real 0m0.760s user 0m0.480s sys 0m0.083s >From outside of this branch typing `M-! time bzr log -r-1 /data/steve/bzr/emacs/quickfixes/lisp/gnus/gnus-group.el' (where this file is the one modified by the last revision on this branch): real 0m0.612s user 0m0.404s sys 0m0.066s >From outside of this branch typing `M-! time bzr log -r-1 /data/steve/bzr/emacs/quickfixes/lisp/gnus/gnus-agent.el' (where this file is not the one modified by the last revision on this branch): real 0m0.557s user 0m0.384s sys 0m0.067s > I guess > this is something to report as a bug to bzr bug tracker. > > Btw, did you really mean "C-x v l RET RET", or did you mean something > like "C-u C-x v l RET 1 RET"? Yes, sorry, I mistakenly omitted the prefix argument (from my posting, not from the command I typed in Emacs). Steve Berman