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 09:49:17 +0200 Message-ID: <83hbgmbmrm.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1287216760 934 80.91.229.12 (16 Oct 2010 08:12:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 08:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 16 10:12:38 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 1P71sc-0006vJ-DT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:12:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43127 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P71sb-0002ez-Lk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 04:12:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60872 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P71nt-0000P2-Vx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 04:07:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P71W8-0007eh-4r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 03:49:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:65525) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P71W7-0007eM-Tz; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 03:49:24 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LAD00D00HNKPV00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:49:17 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.93.189]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LAD00D40HQ3I370@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:49:17 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: 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:131757 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 00:59:53 -0400 > > bzr was slow on savannah due to the use of sftp. > Do people find bzr satisfactory now? It is significantly faster, especially with frequent updates. Where previously I had to wait up to 5-6 minutes for an update of 3-4 days worth of development, now it's down to 1-2 minutes or so, depending on the amount of files that were modified. Where previously it took 2 minutes to update a few files that were modified during several hours since the last update, it now takes 25 seconds. Previously it would take about 40 seconds to get the "tree is up to date" result; now it takes 10 to 15. This is with a 3.5Mbps link, with other jobs running on the same machine and using the link simultaneously. I don't remember the exact timings of CVS, but I think the numbers are comparable, perhaps even slightly faster.