Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: david@lang.hm
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>,
	Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why Git is so fast (was: Re: Eric Sink's blog - notes on git, dscms and a "whole product" approach)
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 12:13:50 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0905011211080.15782@asgard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090501190854.GA13770@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Fri, 1 May 2009, Jeff King wrote:

> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 02:43:49PM -0400, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>>> Like all generalizations, this is only mostly true. Fast network servers
>>> with big caches can outperform disks for some loads.
>> [...]
>> In contrast, a workstation with local filesystems and enough memory to
>> cache it well will just be a lot nicer.
>> [...]
>>> I have never used perforce, but I get the impression that it is more
>>> optimized for such a situation.
>>
>> I doubt it. I suspect git will outperform pretty much anything else in
>> that kind of situation too.
>
> Thanks for the analysis; what you said makes sense to me. However, there
> is at least one case of somebody complaining that git doesn't scale as
> well as perforce for their load:
>
>  http://gandolf.homelinux.org/blog/index.php?id=50
>
> Part of his issue is with git-p4 sucking, which it probably does. But
> part of it sounds like he has a gigantic workload (the description of
> which sounds silly to me, but I respect the fact that he is probably
> describing standard practice among some companies), and that workload is
> just a little too gigantic for the workstations to handle. I.e., by
> throwing resources at the central server they can avoid throwing as many
> at each workstation.
>
> But there are so few details it's hard to say whether he's doing
> something else wrong or suboptimally. He does mention Windows, which
> IIRC has horrific stat performance.

the key thing for his problem is the support for large binary objects. 
there was discussion here a few weeks ago about ways to handle such things 
without trying to pull them into packs. I suspect that solving those sorts 
of issues would go a long way towards closing the gap on this workload.

there may be issues in doing a clone for repositories that large, I don't 
remember exactly what happens when you have something larger than 4G to 
send in a clone.

David Lang

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-01 19:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-04-27  8:55 Eric Sink's blog - notes on git, dscms and a "whole product" approach Martin Langhoff
2009-04-28 11:24 ` Cross-Platform Version Control (was: Eric Sink's blog - notes on git, dscms and a "whole product" approach) Jakub Narebski
2009-04-28 21:00   ` Robin Rosenberg
2009-04-29  6:55   ` Martin Langhoff
2009-04-29  7:21     ` Jeff King
2009-04-29 20:05       ` Markus Heidelberg
2009-04-29  7:52     ` Cross-Platform Version Control Jakub Narebski
2009-04-29  8:25       ` Martin Langhoff
2009-04-28 18:16 ` Eric Sink's blog - notes on git, dscms and a "whole product" approach Jakub Narebski
2009-04-29  7:54   ` Sitaram Chamarty
2009-04-30 12:17   ` Why Git is so fast (was: Re: Eric Sink's blog - notes on git, dscms and a "whole product" approach) Jakub Narebski
2009-04-30 12:56     ` Michael Witten
2009-04-30 15:28       ` Why Git is so fast Jakub Narebski
2009-04-30 18:52         ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-30 20:36           ` Kjetil Barvik
2009-04-30 20:40             ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-30 21:36               ` Kjetil Barvik
2009-05-01  0:23                 ` Steven Noonan
2009-05-01  1:25                   ` James Pickens
2009-05-01  9:19                   ` Kjetil Barvik
2009-05-01  9:34                     ` Mike Hommey
2009-05-01  9:42                       ` Kjetil Barvik
2009-05-01 17:42                 ` Tony Finch
2009-05-01  5:24             ` Dmitry Potapov
2009-05-01  9:42               ` Mike Hommey
2009-05-01 10:46                 ` Dmitry Potapov
2009-04-30 18:43       ` Why Git is so fast (was: Re: Eric Sink's blog - notes on git, dscms and a "whole product" approach) Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-30 14:22     ` Jeff King
2009-05-01 18:43       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-01 19:08         ` Jeff King
2009-05-01 19:13           ` david [this message]
2009-05-01 19:32             ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-05-01 21:17           ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-05-01 21:37           ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-01 22:11             ` david
2009-04-30 18:56     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-30 19:16       ` Alex Riesen
2009-05-04  8:01         ` Why Git is so fast Andreas Ericsson
2009-04-30 19:33       ` Jakub Narebski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.1.10.0905011211080.15782@asgard \
    --to=david@lang.hm \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
    --cc=martin.langhoff@gmail.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox