From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Massive "bzr update" Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:17:50 +0200 Message-ID: <83wrzsag75.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262956977 3981 80.91.229.12 (8 Jan 2010 13:22:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 13:22:57 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 08 14:22:49 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 1NTElf-00078k-Hx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:22:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57582 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTElX-00029X-09 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:20:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTEl5-000211-7Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:20:07 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NTEl0-0001xL-AI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:20:06 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51208 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NTEl0-0001xA-1l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:20:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:43468) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NTEkz-0006CK-Jy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:20:01 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KVX00F00ITG5Z00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:19:46 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.222.44]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KVX00EH0JOXMGE0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:19:46 +0200 (IST) X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:119686 Archived-At: I just resync'ed with the repository, and bzr again pulled almost 200MB through the wire. It took 21 minutes. I watched the CPU meter: it stayed below 10% almost all the time, with a few peaks at 30%. The memory footprint went steadily up to 300MB, then stayed there for most of the time; that is not too bad on my 1.5GB box. So the only bottleneck could be network throughput (pulling 200MB should take around 15 minutes for my connection, which is a large portion of the 21 minutes it took). But 3.5Mbps connection is not exactly a slow one, so I don't expect weekly updates to be that slow. The files it updated were just a few: M doc/lispref/ChangeLog M doc/lispref/control.texi M doc/lispref/display.texi M doc/lispref/os.texi M doc/lispref/positions.texi M doc/lispref/text.texi M doc/lispref/variables.texi M doc/misc/ChangeLog M doc/misc/calc.texi M doc/misc/gnus.texi M lisp/ChangeLog M lisp/font-setting.el M lisp/gnus/ChangeLog M lisp/gnus/gnus-art.el M lisp/gnus/gnus-sum.el M lisp/gnus/gnus-util.el M lisp/gnus/message.el M lisp/international/fontset.el M lisp/language/indian.el M lisp/progmodes/python.el M lisp/vc-bzr.el M lisp/vc-dir.el M src/ChangeLog M src/dbusbind.c M src/font.c M src/font.h M src/fontset.c M src/gtkutil.c M src/keyboard.c M src/nsfns.m M src/xftfont.c M src/xterm.c My previous "bzr up" was 6 days ago. I'm used to update my tree once a week, because I only have time to work on Emacs on weekends. Is this massive and slow update something I should look forward to, until Savannah admins enable bzr+ssh? Or is this again something ``exceptional'', like the problem we had last week? For comparison, a "cvs up" would take about 1/10 of that time, even though my CVS tree was checked-out with -kb (to avoid EOL conversions), so it would send entire files downstream instead just the patches.