Re: Switching from CVS to GIT

From: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
Date: Oct 16, 2007, 16:59 UTC
Message-ID: <4714EDE7.3010407@op5.se>
In-Reply-To: <E1Ihfrl-0007w1-3I@fencepost.gnu.org>

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

>> From: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
> 
>> I *think* (correct me if I'm wrong) that git is still faster
>> than a whole bunch of other scm's on windows, but to one who's used to
>> its performance on Linux that waiting several seconds to scan 10k files
>> just feels wrong.
> 
> Unless that 10K is a typo and you really meant 100K, I don't think 10K
> files should take several seconds to scan on Windows.  I just tried
> "find -print" on a directory with 32K files in 4K subdirectories, and
> it took 8 sec elapsed with a hot cache.  So 10K files should take at
> most 2 seconds, even without optimizing file traversal code.  Doing
> the same with native Windows system calls ("dir /s") brings that down
> to 4 seconds for 32K files.
>

It was a typo. Thanks for correcting me.

> On the other hand, what packages have 100K files?  If there's only one
> -- the Linux kernel -- then I think this kind of performance is for
> all practical purposes unimportant on Windows

But it's most definitely not. The *huge* projects that have looked at git have sometimes turned it down simply because they're either cross- platform (Mozilla) or they have translators that use windows exclusively (KDE and Mozilla, just to mention two).

Both Mozilla and KDE repos are *much* larger than the Linux repo.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231