This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
I am using 6.1rc1 and mevenide 3.0.12 and expanding source packages is very slow. I tested it in general java project and it works good.
did you test on comparable project size? at the time when no other background threads in the IDE were running? It would be interesting to get a few thread dumps during the process of expanding the packages..
yes, I created same project as netbeans java project and it works ok. I discovered that expanding source packages in maven project is slow only sometimes. It takes up to 20 seconds with 193 java files and 60 folders. I don't know when it happends.
well, this sort of thing is very hard to reliably reproduce as they are many things in play. the expanding action needs to iterate and examine deep folder structures. ON the OS level it's speed often relies on having the stuff cached. I've seen the same thing with "Open project" action for netbeans.org projects. There's 800+ projects in one directory but the opening involves looking the in subdirectories as well, for nbproject/project.xml file presence. When done the first time after computer reboot, it takes a significant amount of time, any subsequent opening (even from other IDE instance I think) takes less time already.. A bunch of thread dumps during the 20 seconds of opening the packages would help for sure. We might indeed be doing something wrong there. Or some other unrelated activity is happening in the IDE that eats CPU/Disk resources.
It looks like problem with mercurial. I do some profiling and thread dumps. Results are in attachements. Problematic is HgUtils.isIgnored() method. I am using mercurial 1.0. May I change Component and Subcomponent of this issue to mercurial/code?
Created attachment 60144 [details] most of time is in this stack
Created attachment 60145 [details] profiler screenshot
reassigning to mercurial support for evaluation.
I am closing this as a duplicate of 132835. 132835 is clsoed as a duplciate of 134902 as the attachment of that bug should fix this problem. *** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 132835 ***