On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 20:11 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: >Vadim Nasardinov writes: > > On Friday 11 March 2005 14:04, Andrew Haley wrote: > > > > Does this get amortized so that you don't regenerate it for each package > > > > in a transaction? Otherwise are we getting O(n^2) work? > > > > > > It's very fast. 0.7 seconds for all of jonas, and that's 300 jarfiles > > > and 40,000 classes. > > > > That doesn't answer his question though, does it? > >No, it doesn't, but it does suggest that it's a second order effect >and so probably not worth worrying about for the time being. > >There is an N^2 effect, yes. But if we're to do anything more >sophisticated maybe RPM will have to have some sort of new >functionality. Yeah, I was just being paranoid. IIRC we had some problems on the desktop when regenerating mimetype databases, and scrollkeeper for documentation. I think scrollkeeper was the big offender here, since it wasn't fast, and its database regeneration hook used to bring RPM to its knees (successively regenerating the database for package 1, then for package 2, etc all the way through a transaction)
