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.

Bug 204219 - 109s in SVN while renaming single file
Summary: 109s in SVN while renaming single file
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: versioncontrol
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Subversion (show other bugs)
Version: 7.0
Hardware: All All
: P3 normal (vote)
Assignee: Ondrej Vrabec
URL:
Keywords: PERFORMANCE
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-10-25 14:57 UTC by lothar
Modified: 2011-11-03 08:05 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter: 182298

Attachments
nps snapshot (161.13 KB, application/nps)
2011-10-25 14:57 UTC, lothar 		Details
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description lothar 2011-10-25 14:57:27 UTC 
This bug was originally marked as duplicate of bug 178097, that is already resolved. This bug is still valid, so this seems to be another bug, but it might be related.

Build: NetBeans IDE 7.0 (Build 201104080000)
VM: Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM, 20.0-b11, Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment, 1.6.0_25-b06
OS: Windows 7

User Comments:
lothar: when a create or rename a file , Netbeans freeze



Maximum slowness yet reported was 109690 ms, average is 109690
Comment 1 lothar 2011-10-25 14:57:34 UTC 
Created attachment 112410 [details]
nps snapshot
Comment 2 Ondrej Vrabec 2011-10-25 16:29:37 UTC 
Rename slowed down by unresponsive Windows file system - one call of java.io.File takes about 10 seconds.
However FileObject.rename should not be called in AWT, reassigning to Data Systems
Comment 3 Jaroslav Tulach 2011-11-03 08:05:52 UTC 
Nodes can say that they want to be renamed outside of AWT since bug 190736 was implemented. I changed DataFolder to use the "slowRename", but I don't want to change all DataNodes, as there are many subclasses and I'd risk incompatibilities.

Should there be more reports of this kind, we can reconsider this.

Anyway, do you believe that SVN behavior is optimal? Should not this information be already pre-cached when the file is visible in the explorer?