On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
quoted text
> 
> Sure.  But at this point the reference to compare GIT performance 
> against might be GIT itself.  And while 1 second is really nice in this 
> case, there are some repos where it could be (and has already been 
> reported to be) much more.

I'd still like to see the KDE repo, that thing went quiet after it was 
supposed to hit sneaker-net..

If it was 30 seconds before to do a "git log" for some individual file, 
after the recent optimizations it should hopefully be down to 10. And I 
agree that I might be more motivated to try to get it down further if I 
could just find a repository where it's that much. 

Right now I can can do a "git log" on any file in the kernel archive in 
under a second (well, when I say "any file", I started with a script, but 
with 22 thousand files I didn't bother to run it for all that long, so I 
ended up testing a few random files in addition to the first few hundred 
files of "git ls-files", and they are all well under a second).

And that's without the "git diff --quiet" thing that is still in "next", 
and that cut down some of the overhead for other reasons (although I 
suspect the effect of that will be less when combined with my patches 
since the stuff it cut down I probably cut down even more).

I really suspect you'll have a hard time beating "normal" git with the 
patches I sent out. I'm sure it's quite possible - don't get me wrong - I 
just suspect it won't be spectacular, and it will be a lot of work.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html