[darcs-users] performance; clone?

[Aaron Denney]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 05:52:14PM -0400, David Roundy wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 02:41:54PM -0400, Dan Egnor wrote:
> > We noticed that if you fetch the darcs repository, undo a few dozen
> > patches, and then pulled the repository again, it takes a very long 
> > time (killed it after running for 45 minutes) -- much longer than it 
> > took to get the repository in the first place.  Is this known to be slow?
> 
> If you leave out the revert, it will have to try to resolve a large number
> of conflicts in your working directory, which could take some time.

Right, I left out the revert.  A warning in the documentation might be
in order.

> Soft links would require a promise on the part of the repo linked to that
> it wouldn't reorder (or delete patches that might be unrecorded).  "Remote
> soft links" (i.e. links to an URL) would be particularly nifty, as they
> could be used with a not-yet-implemented feature allowing downloading of a
> tarball of a tagged version to allow you to do a 'get' without downloading
> and storing the entire history of the repository.  So I may want to add a
> 'static' flag, or something, which would indicate that the repo promises
> not to delete any patches (currently it doesn't delete unrecorded patches
> anyways) or reorder patches.

Those all sound very scary.

-- 
Aaron Denney
-><-