From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Dhruva Krishnamurthy" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Slow access to files using UNC path Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:06:07 +0530 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <1093494967.3662.203084298@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1089978045.7826.200489429@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1090070598.482.200548261@webmail.messagingengine.com> <2914-Sun18Jul2004070932+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <1090131145.14224.200572407@webmail.messagingengine.com> <2914-Sun18Jul2004214112+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <1090211717.23633.200609317@webmail.messagingengine.com> <7494-Mon19Jul2004210954+0300-eliz@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1093495018 27208 80.91.224.253 (26 Aug 2004 04:36:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 04:36:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 26 06:36:45 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1C0C0D-00089S-00 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 06:36:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0C4o-0000Wu-Fg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:41:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1C0C4i-0000WW-I7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:41:24 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1C0C4g-0000W5-PP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:41:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C0C4g-0000W2-Mc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:41:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [66.111.4.30] (helo=frontend1.messagingengine.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C0Bzc-0005yi-9c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:36:08 -0400 Original-Received: from server2.messagingengine.com (server2.internal [10.202.2.133]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16839C151FD; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:36:07 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by server2.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 1600685629; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:36:07 -0400 (EDT) Content-Disposition: inline X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 1.4 (F2.72; T1.001; A1.62; B3.01; Q3.01) In-Reply-To: Original-To: "KOBAYASHI Yasuhiro" X-Sasl-Enc: qo6ByNpddNN3vBYvvycTsA 1093494967 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:26510 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:26510 Hello, I applied the patch (manually as I do not have a patch utility on win32). It does not seem to make a difference to me. Let me explain the steps I followed. 1. I manually applied the on to the files 2. Byte compiled them 3. Re-started emacs and tried accessing the file in UNC (without my defadvice hack) 4. It took the same time. One observation I have made which might help in identifying the cause. When I open the file literally, it is real fast. As fast as opening a local file. When I change the mode (as per file contents, ex: If I open a C++ file, I change it to c++-mode) and _then_ try to _save_ the changes, it again takes a very long time. So, the time I save by opening a file literally is lost when I try to save the changes. If I open the same file as usual, I spend the long time while opening the file but saving is _fast_ (as for any local file). With this, I feel it is not something with search (as the patch seems to change). I may be wrong in my deduction, correct me if so. with best regards, dhruva On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:44:08 +0900, "KOBAYASHI Yasuhiro" said: > Maybe I found out the reason why slow access occured. > > '(file-directory-p "//{arch}")' or '(file-directory-p "//MCVS/CVS")' > is executed in vc-arch-registered or vc-mcvs-registered > even though '{arch}' or 'MCVS' as computers dosen't exist. > > So what about the following patch? > ________________________________________ Dhruva Krishnamurthy Proud FSF member: #1935 http://schemer.fateback.com/