From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is bzr+ssh's speed satisfactory? Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:54:14 +0200 Message-ID: <83eibqbmjd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20101016.080817.485378771.wl@gnu.org> <20101016.081001.354842786.wl@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1287216632 417 80.91.229.12 (16 Oct 2010 08:10:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Werner LEMBERG Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 16 10:10:29 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P71qT-0005xE-K3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:10:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41616 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P71qS-0001hw-5P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 04:10:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58560 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P71nB-0008Mu-EU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 04:07:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P71ay-0008SW-H4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 03:54:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:41006) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P71ay-0008S2-9g; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 03:54:24 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LAD00G00HTMLK00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:54:13 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.93.189]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LAD00GO4HYC2070@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:54:13 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <20101016.081001.354842786.wl@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:131755 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:10:01 +0200 (CEST) > From: Werner LEMBERG > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > > Well, I'm only doing `bzr pull', and it seems indeed to be more > > responsive than previously. However, the amount of data transferred > > by bzr is still excessively large. For example, updating from > > rev. 101894 (Oct. 10th) to today's rev. 101979 (with `bzr pull') > > used more than 20MByte! > > I forgot to mention that I'm currently using bzr version 2.0.5 in case > this makes a difference w.r.t. the amount of transferred data. I doubt that: I have Bazaar 2.2.1, and the combined size of the data between Oct 10 and yesterday was 19MB or me.