From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `bzr viz' slooow Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:10:55 +0100 Message-ID: <87pr4vvm4g.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <20100126.180554.173876640.wl@gnu.org> <20100127.070205.124081201.wl@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1264591062 19105 80.91.229.12 (27 Jan 2010 11:17:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:17:42 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 27 12:17:34 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Na5sj-0007i7-Ap for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:16:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55258 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Na5sk-0001Qs-8j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:16:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Na5sb-0001Ps-Hz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:16:13 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Na5sV-0001Mb-4v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:16:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44266 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Na5sV-0001MU-0P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:16:07 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:43277) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Na5sU-0003ph-0J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:16:06 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Na5px-0005ps-2h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:13:29 +0100 Original-Received: from 92.red-88-24-231.staticip.rima-tde.net ([88.24.231.92]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:13:29 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 92.red-88-24-231.staticip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:13:29 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 29 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 92.red-88-24-231.staticip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.91 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:QX94ugiK8z6g3nPpWbHmv8R1bSw= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:120490 Archived-At: Werner LEMBERG writes: >> Isn't this the problem of the bzr-gtk plugin and how it is >> implemented? > > Maybe. However, it is quite generic and basically independent of the > version of bzr. In other words, it uses calls to the bzr > infrastructure to get the data. And why do you think that it is bzr the main culprit? Haven't you seen the timings about qlog, which does the same thing but much faster? Have you forgotten about the possibility of displaying the graph at the same time that the data is collected, the same way gitk does? Or is this about blaming bzr and make it look bad? >> I think it's more productive and appropriate to file a bug against >> it. > > Will do, of course. Great, because the biggest slowdown by far is in viz, not in bzr. >> (btw, my machine took about 57 sec and I'm fine with that.) > > Either your machine is much faster than mine, or you have `light' > checkout. Actually, building the graph on a lightweight checkout of a remote branch will require *much* more time.