Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Date: Apr 29, 2005, 17:09 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504291006450.18901@ppc970.osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050429163705.GU21897@waste.org>

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Matt Mackall wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> 
> That's because no one paid attention until I posted performance
> numbers comparing it to git! Mercurial's goals are:
> 
> - to scale to the kernel development process
> - to do clone/pull style development
> - to be efficient in CPU, memory, bandwidth, and disk space
>   for all the common SCM operations
> - to have strong repo integrity

Ok, sounds good. Have you looked at how it scales over time, ie what happens with files that have a lot of delta's?

Let's see how these things work out..

		Linus

$ 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.