From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Git benchmarks at OpenOffice.org wiki Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 16:35:17 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <200705012346.14997.jnareb@gmail.com> <200705021624.25560.kendy@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org, releases@openoffice.org To: Jan Holesovsky X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 02 16:35:17 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 1HjFvH-0003d5-Cs for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 02 May 2007 16:35:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2993255AbXEBOfL (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 May 2007 10:35:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S2993256AbXEBOfL (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 May 2007 10:35:11 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:52333 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S2993255AbXEBOfK (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 May 2007 10:35:10 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 02 May 2007 14:35:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp057) with SMTP; 02 May 2007 16:35:08 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/oGCwgK/vozHVhDBCIRlV79/oTz22+0RO8uku4EX fyM9WrRdLFpo0C X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <200705021624.25560.kendy@suse.cz> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 2 May 2007, Jan Holesovsky wrote: > On Tuesday 01 May 2007 23:46, Jakub Narebski wrote: > > > What I am concerned about is some of git benchmark results at Git page > > on OpenOffice.org wiki: > > http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Git#Comparison > > Actually it is comparison with CVS and Subversion, although most > > benchmarks are done only for git. > > I did the git numbers, so if they are wrong - blame me :-) Good to have you here! > > 'Checkout time' (which should be renamed to 'Initial checkout time'), > > in which git also loses with 130 minutes (Linux, 2MBit DSL) [from > > go-oo.org], 100min (Linux, 2MBit DSL, Wireless, no proxy) [from > > go-oo.org] versus 117 minutes (Linux, 2MBit DSL), 26 minutes (Linux, > > 2MBit DSL, with compression (-z 6)) for CVS, and 60 Minutes (Windows, > > 34Mbit Line) for Subversion, would also be helped by the above. > > Good point, and I already changed the page in the morning. I also added the > checkout time that I got over a fast line [it was 44min]. It took me longer here, but the reason might be that my "local" repository is on NFS, due to quota on the machine. > > What I'm really concerned about is branch switch and merging branches, > > when one of the branches is an old one (e.g. unxsplash branch), which > > takes 3min (!) according to the benchmark. 13-25sec for commit is also > > bit long, but BRANCH SWITCHING which takes 3 MINUTES!? There is no > > comparison benchmark for CVS or Subversion, though... I imagine that might be related to the vast amount of remote branches. IIRC we do not pack them with git-gc, and ext3 is not that good with big directories (remember: 3464 branches!). Maybe oprofile knows a bit more where the hotspots are. Ciao, Dscho