Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks

Mike Taht
2005-04-26T02:32:15Z

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Matt Mackall wrote:
>
>>Here are the results of checking in the first 12 releases of Linux 2.6
>>into empty repositories for Mercurial v0.3 (hg) and git-pasky-0.7.
>>This is on my 512M Pentium M laptop. Times are in seconds.

One difference is probably - mercurial appears to be using zlib's
*default* compression of 6....

using zlib compression of 9 really impacts git...

as per http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/archives/git/0504/1988.html

>On a 700MHz p3, UDMA33, freebsd 5.3, ffs (soft updates) I get:

>compressor | levels (size, time to compress, time to uncompress)
>-----------+-------------------------------------------------------------------
>gzip | 9 (28M, 1:19, 30), 6 (28M, 31.7, 30), 3 (30M, 26.1,28.7)
> | 1 (31M, 23.6, 29.8)
>bzip2 | 9 (27M, 2:14, 37.4) 6 (27M, 2:11, 38.8) 3 (27M, 2:10,38.3)
>lzop | 9 (32M, 2:15, 35.4) 7 (32M, 57.9, 40.3) 3 (39M, 36.0,44.4)

as per setting GIT_COMPRESSION 3 rather than Z_BEST_COMPRESSION

http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/archives/git/0504/1478.html

>>
>> user system real du -sh
>>ver files hg git hg git hg git hg git
>>
>>2.6.0 15007 19.949 35.526 3.171 2.264 25.138 87.994 145M 89M
>>2.6.1 998 5.906 4.018 0.573 0.464 10.267 5.937 146M 99M
>>2.6.2 2370 9.696 13.051 0.752 0.652 12.970 15.167 150M 117M
>>2.6.3 1906 10.528 11.509 0.816 0.639 18.406 14.318 152M 135M
>>2.6.4 3185 11.140 7.380 0.997 0.731 15.265 12.412 156M 158M
>>2.6.5 2261 10.961 6.939 0.843 0.640 20.564 8.522 158M 177M
>>2.6.6 2642 11.803 10.043 0.870 0.678 22.360 11.515 162M 197M
>>2.6.7 3772 18.411 15.243 1.189 0.915 32.397 21.498 165M 227M
>>2.6.8 4604 20.922 16.054 1.406 1.041 39.622 25.056 172M 262M
>>2.6.9 4712 19.306 12.145 1.421 1.102 35.663 24.958 179M 297M
>>2.6.10 5384 23.022 18.154 1.393 1.182 40.947 32.085 186M 338M
>>2.6.11 5662 27.211 19.138 1.791 1.253 42.605 31.902 193M 379M

--

Mike Taht

"Imagination is more important than knowledge.
-- Albert Einstein"