bug-cvs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: problems building feature release on windows


From: Todd Denniston
Subject: Re: problems building feature release on windows
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 16:52:13 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929)

Mark D. Baushke wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kelly F. Hickel <address@hidden> writes:


-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Mark D. Baushke



<snip>

One very odd thing that I have no explanation
for is that I moved from a 4 way 700mhz PIII to
a 2 way 2.4 mhz PIV and it takes roughly the
same amount of time. The only inkling of an
explanation is that I was running cvspserver
1.11.x on the PIII and am running 1.12.13 on the
PIV. The cvs process is definitely CPU bound
during this operation (according to top and
xosview).


It will be reading the existing files and copying
them in to temporary ,filename, files and adding
the new tag along the way. I would have thought
that operation would be more IO bound than CPU
bound, but I have not looked at it closely in a
long time.


With the trouble you are having getting it compiled on windows, it would probably be better to do some empirical testing first to be sure of what you are looking for.

Like Mark I would expect the bottle neck to be the file IO more so than the CPU. I suspect that if the server machine is only serving CVS, that if you brought the PIII up in uniprocessor mode it would still almost[1] keep up with the PIV because cvs server is a single threaded process.


A useful test to see if it is file IO vs CPU bound would be to put your repository, temp dir and LockDir in a RAM disk (loop device) to remove the hard drive rewriting. If it was CPU bound you would get the same timing I THINK.

You might also try with and without the -z option to cvs, I don't know the protocol well enough to be sure, but a tag operation I think sends each file name individually to the server, it would be unlikely but perhaps you have enough message traffic during a tag to swamp your net (really unlikely). (might never mind this, I reread part of your email and local access and pserver are taking the same amount of time.)


[1] I believe, If it could be brought up in dual processor it would probably be the same timing you see now, because one processor would be handling CVS and the other the file and net IO.

--
Todd Denniston
Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane)
Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]