Re: git performance

[Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>]

Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>> Yes, it does stat all the files. How many files are you talking about,
>> and what platform?  From a warm cache on Linux, the 23,000 files kernel
>> repo takes about a tenth of a second to stat all files for me (and this
>> on a several year-old machine). And of course many operations don't
>> require stat'ing at all (like looking at logs, or diffs that don't
>> involve the working tree).
> 
> No worries.  No solution can meet everyone's needs.
> 
> I'm talking about 40-50,000 files, on multi-user production linux, which means the cache is never warm, except when I'm benchmarking.  Specifically RHEL 4 with the files on NFS mount.  Cold cache "svn st" takes ~10 mins.  Warm cache 20-30 sec.  Surprisingly to me, performance was approx the same for files on local disk versus NFS.  Probably the best solution for us is perforce, we just don't like the pricetag.
> 
> Out of curiosity, what are they talking about, when they say "git is fast?"  Just the fact that it's all local disk, or is there more to it than that?  I could see - git would probably outperform perforce for versioning of large files (let's say iso files) to benefit from sustained local disk IO, while perforce would probably outperform anything I can think of, operating on thousands of tiny files, because it will never walk the tree.
> 



> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231