From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruno Haible Subject: Re: how to speed up "git log"? Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:52:23 +0100 Message-ID: <200702120052.23468.bruno@clisp.org> References: <200702111252.28393.bruno@clisp.org> <20070211152840.GA2781@steel.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Alex Riesen X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 12 00:46:28 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HGOOp-00081Q-Dh for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:46:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932925AbXBKXqY (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:46:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932926AbXBKXqY (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:46:24 -0500 Received: from mo-p07-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.190]:59765 "EHLO mo-p07-ob.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932925AbXBKXqX (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:46:23 -0500 Received: from linuix.haible.de (cable-137-244.iesy.net [81.210.137.244]) by post.webmailer.de (klopstock mo34) (RZmta 4.5) with ESMTP id D00fdbj1BIQWWz ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:46:21 +0100 (MET) User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 In-Reply-To: <20070211152840.GA2781@steel.home> Content-Disposition: inline X-RZG-AUTH: gMysVb8JT2gB+rFDu0PuvnPihAP8oFdePhw95HsN8T+WAEY4JDyuz6KRYg== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Alex Riesen wrote: > - do not use "tr.c", unless you really need it: git has to read more > of a commit in this case. Just "git log" takes only 0.9 sec on the > machine above. "git log" is indeed faster, but is useless for the given task, since it doesn't show which of the 4 megabytes of commit messages apply to tr.c. > > On a file in a local copy of the coreutils git repository, > > "git log tr.c > output" takes > > Why do you need _all_ commits, btw? I want to quickly find the cause of a behaviour change between tr.c of coreutils 5.2.1 and the one of coreutils 6.4. It's a period of 1.5 years, but limited to a single file. Can't git produce this quickly? > > 2) Why so much system CPU time, but only on MacOS X? > > MacOS X is famous for its bad perfomance when doing serious work. > The mmap(2) of it, in particular. But at least, a MacOS X machine is still interactively usable when it uses 6 times more swap than the machine's RAM size. Whereas a Linux 2.4 machine is interactively unusable already with 1.5 to 2 times more swap than the machine has RAM. Bruno