{"thread":{"id":"30275","subject":"git-svn: a interesting difference in performance as compared to Tortoise SVN","startedAt":"2012-04-18T05:56:09Z","lastAt":"2012-04-18T05:56:09Z","messageCount":1,"participants":["Jon Seymour"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"189603","messageId":"CAH3AnrrY2F9rfTTFpTuBaRQmT4jHsS=WPTNTcWZGA8Oqz_UtQg@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"30275","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"git-svn: a interesting difference in performance as compared to Tortoise SVN","fromName":"Jon Seymour","fromEmail":"jon.seymour@gmail.com","sentAt":"2012-04-18T05:56:09Z","receivedAt":"2012-04-18T05:56:09Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jon.seymour@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/207131?v=4"},"body":"I thought others might be interested in this slightly\ncounter-intuitive performance of git-svn as opposed to Tortoise SVN.\n\nThe SVN repo is exposed via HTTP. The current tree is about 8500 files\nand consumes 300MB of disk, checked out. The git repo is 200MB. There\nare around 231 commits in the history.\n\nThe initially slightly counter-intuitive aspect is that given the\ncurrent state of the repo, git-svn is 4 times faster when it pulls the\nentire history than TortoiseSVN is when it checks out just the current\nhead. It seems that the extra network cost of the extra git-svn\nretrieval is dwarfed by the local processing costs of the TortoiseSVN\nclient.\n\njon.\n"}]}