From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs repository benchmark: bzr and git Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:24:37 +0900 Message-ID: <87od90ewey.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <20080318154316.GA6242@mithlond.arda.local> <47DFE4EA.5000600@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1206584197 12895 80.91.229.12 (27 Mar 2008 02:16:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 02:16:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tlikonen@iki.fi, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Jonathan Lange" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 27 03:17:07 2008 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 4.50) id 1Jehfp-0006U7-JC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 03:17:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JehfE-0001ni-3c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:16:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jehec-000196-0k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:15:46 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JeheZ-00016N-5c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:15:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JeheY-00015y-LR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:15:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JeheU-00006i-Tc; Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:15:39 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5B98001; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:15:37 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 48A6A1A29F3; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:24:37 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" 2785829fe37c XEmacs Lucid X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:93599 Archived-At: The bazaar people already know this, removing bazaar from the addressees. Jonathan Lange writes: > I've tried to get a list of things that Bazaar needs to improve from > trawling through this list and bugs on the Bazaar tracker. Robert Collins posted an excellent summary of why the "pack" format repo will make a foundation for rapid progress on performance, and also summarized his view of what things need fixing. (Sorry, I"m just before getting on a plane, but it's in the "bazaar" thread on "more plans, less excuses" or something like that.) > [1] Bazaar tends to assume you want to work with the whole tree for > every operation. I think this might be the root cause of a lot of the > disappointment in Bazaar's performance. Do you mean whole tree, or whole history? If it's "whole tree", then git is the obvious counterexample, with most operations on whole trees being O(1). Even for "whole history", gitk is an order of magnitude faster than bzr log.