On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 04:24:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> That's not true: ext2 queries and directory lists are the problem here,
> in that they're O(N) and O(N^2) rather than O(1)/O(N). Using reiser or
> subdirectories would reduce those to O(lg(N)) and O(N lg(N)).
Of course, it looks like either (a) Linux's fs caches have much better
complexity, as long as you've got the RAM to use them, or (b) the
huge jump in master's specs (thanks HP! :) has made the performance
problems pretty trivial. Either way, the indices are only taking about
14s to generate from scratch atm, so we'll be making them happen a lot
more often. For reference, they're now at every 30mins, down from every
four hours.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgp4IGBzcqmj1.pgp
Description: PGP signature