From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:50:55 GMT
Subject: Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504291248210.18901@ppc970.osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050429191207.GX21897@waste.org>



On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
> Here's an excerpt from http://selenic.com/mercurial/notes.txt on how
> the back-end works.

Any notes on how you maintain repository-level information?

For example, the expense in BK wasn't the single-file history, it was the
_repository_ history, ie the "ChangeSet" file. Which grows quite slowly,
but because it _always_ grows, it ends up being quite big and expensive to
parse after three years.

Ie do you have the git kind of "independent trees/commits", or do you 
create a revision history of those too?

		Linus