comments

diff --git a/doc/todo/registerurl__58___do_changes_in_journal___34__in_place__34____63__/comment_13_0154b05e0b0edccd8e69657501938d92._comment b/doc/todo/registerurl__58___do_changes_in_journal___34__in_place__34____63__/comment_13_0154b05e0b0edccd8e69657501938d92._comment
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..9a425d0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/todo/registerurl__58___do_changes_in_journal___34__in_place__34____63__/comment_13_0154b05e0b0edccd8e69657501938d92._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="joey"
+ subject="""comment 13"""
+ date="2022-07-18T18:01:09Z"
+ content="""
+The `append` branch has basic appending implemented, but it's not yet
+done atomically.
+
+For benchmarking, I'm using this command.
+
+       perl -e 'for (1..'$ITER') { print "WORM--foo http://example.com/$_\n" }' | /usr/bin/time git-annex registerurl --batch
+
+ITER=2000  
+Old: 52s  
+Appending:  28s  
+Appending without reading old value: 2s
+
+ITER=4000  
+Old: 190s  
+Appending:  111s  
+Appending without reading old value: 5s
+
+
+So an improvement of 50%. But remains nonlinear even when appending,
+because it needs to read the existing log file each time to determine if it
+can append, or if it needs to compact it. (Disk cache didn't work as well
+as I had hoped.)
+
+What this suggests to me is that it would be good to also add a mode that
+blindly appends without compacting. Or, possibly, to blindly append,
+but then compact the journalled file before committing it to the git-annex
+branch.
+"""]]

diff --git a/doc/todo/registerurl__58___do_changes_in_journal___34__in_place__34____63__/comment_14_aafc89e24d5640dad3b8f6134c1ac26b._comment b/doc/todo/registerurl__58___do_changes_in_journal___34__in_place__34____63__/comment_14_aafc89e24d5640dad3b8f6134c1ac26b._comment
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..e472855
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/todo/registerurl__58___do_changes_in_journal___34__in_place__34____63__/comment_14_aafc89e24d5640dad3b8f6134c1ac26b._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="joey"
+ subject="""re: comment 12"""
+ date="2022-07-18T18:40:20Z"
+ content="""
+@yarikoptic, the new git-annex would resolve the insonsistency the next
+time it ran. Only when annex.alwayscommit=false would there be any time
+window where the old git-annex missed something written by git-annex
+process that ran before the one that got interrupted. This does not seem
+like a large problem.
+"""]]