dorsal team mailing list archive

[Joachim Berdal Haga <jobh@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just a note - this won't help casual users, but for the download is
fast if you use "bzr init-repo" on a parent directory and have
populated the shared object pool already:

sec ~/src/fenics/src 0$ bzr info ..
Shared repository with trees (format: 2a)
Location:
  shared repository: /home/jobh/src/fenics
sec ~/src/fenics/src 0$ time bzr branch lp:dolfin
Branched 7015 revisions.

real    0m9.045s
user    0m2.300s
sys     0m0.328s

-j.



On 22 October 2012 18:30, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 12:52:42PM +0200, Joachim Berdal Haga wrote:
>> Perhaps include .bzr in the tarball?
>
> I think the advantage will disappear then it would increase the size
> of the tarball by a factor 10.
>
>> On 22 October 2012 12:49, Harish Narayanan <harish.mlists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > I see, and agree
>> >
>> > Then, apart from timing, I am only hesitant for one more reason: I
>> > occasionally maintain local changes to the different source trees for
>> > sillyness that is specific to my machine. Using bzr allows me to not
>> > blow them away on upgrade, but refetching tarballs will do so.
>
> Perhaps we could add another keyword in addition to "skip" which would
> only skip the download, not the build?
>
> --
> Anders
>
>
>> > On 10/22/12 9:47 AM, Anders Logg wrote:
>> >> It's just the general feeling I get when experimenting with a new
>> >> setup for my system (and therefore running Dorsal repeatedly for
>> >> testing). External packages are built fast, but simple stuff like FFC
>> >> takes a really long time just becase the bzr download is so slow.
>> >>
>> >> Here are some numbers for DOLFIN:
>> >>
>> >> $ time wget http://fenicsproject.org/pub/software/dolfin/dolfin-snapshot.tar.gz
>> >> real    0m23.555s
>> >>
>> >> $ time bzr branch lp:dolfin
>> >> real    5m7.337s
>> >>
>> >> $ cd dolfin; time bzr pull
>> >> real    0m7.107s
>> >>
>> >> So when doing a fresh install, the difference is 23s for tarball vs
>> >> 5min for bzr.
>> >>
>> >> And for updated install, the difference is 23s for tarball vs 7s for
>> >> bzr, in the best case (longer for bzr if something actually changed).
>> >>
>> >> The extra 16s for tarball update is not very noticeable, but the extra
>> >> 5 min for fresh install with bzr is very noticeable.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:21:57AM +0200, Harish Narayanan wrote:
>> >>> Hmm. I am not sure. I guess that depends on how often one updates their
>> >>> sources for unstable builds on dorsal.
>> >>>
>> >>> Harish
>> >>>
>> >>> On 10/22/12 9:20 AM, Anders Logg wrote:
>> >>>> Yes, but my assertion is that cost is smaller than needing to branch
>> >>>> the entire source tree.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I mean the user pulling it via dorsal from fpo. They then have to get
>> >>>>> the entire tarball each time, right? (As opposed to tiny deltas via bzr).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Harish
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 10/22/12 9:14 AM, Anders Logg wrote:
>> >>>>>> How do you mean? The snapshot would be updated every 5 min by a
>> >>>>>> cronjob on fenicsproject.org.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> And how would one update the snapshot, which I am assuming is a tarball
>> >>>>>>> created by bzr archive (or whatever the export command is)?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Harish
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 10/22/12 9:09 AM, Anders Logg wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> Would it be a good idea to store snapshots of the FEniCS packages on
>> >>>>>>>> the server for faster installation with Dorsal? The bzr cloning takes
>> >>>>>>>> forever. We could have a cronjob running on the server for pulling and
>> >>>>>>>> updating the snapshots every say 5 min. We are already pulling for the
>> >>>>>>>> buildbots.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dorsal
>> > Post to     : dorsal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dorsal
>> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp