git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: cvs update vs. git pull

From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date
May 28, 2010, 13:07 UTC
Message-ID
<AANLkTikPWfNhL1HxYQdtdPeJpHxrm5qDkkwbXFM6MAV2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<vpqhblss65x.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 09:54, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines
> René Moser <mail@renemoser.net> writes:
>
>> One problem we have is, that if there is a commit to cvs while the cvs
>> update of the build job is running (and this takes 20 minutes), then we
>> get some inconsistence, the build will fail.
>
> Git will also bring a big performance improvement here. The duration
> of the "git pull" will be mostly O(number of modifications since last
> pull), not O(total number of files).

A while back I tried converting a huge (~40k directories) CVS repository to SVN and Git. Both CVS and SVN took around 10 minutes to cvs/svn up. git clone took around 8 minutes but each pull was around 5-15 seconds (I/O and network bound).

They eventually picked Bazaar for non-technical reasons. But yeah, Git's much faster to upgrade than CVS/SVN.

Previous: Matthieu MoyNext: Robin Rosenberg
Message 5 of 6 in “cvs update vs. git pull”
  1. René MoserMay 28, 2010
  2. Andreas EricssonMay 28, 2010
  3. Tor ArntsenMay 28, 2010
  4. Matthieu MoyMay 28, 2010
  5. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonMay 28, 2010
  6. Robin RosenbergMay 28, 2010

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.