Re: VCS comparison table

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Oct 20, 2006, 15:39 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0610201736440.14200@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <200610201728.13327.jnareb@gmail.com>

Hi,

On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> > 
> >> Christian MICHON wrote:
> >> 
> >>> - git is the fastest scm around
> >> 
> >> Mercurial also claims that.
> > 
> > Funny. When you type in "mercurial" and "benchmark" into Google, the 
> > _first_ hit is into "git Archives: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb 
> > benchmark". Performed by the good Mercurial people.
> > 
> > Leaving git as winner.
>  
> Check out http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitBenchmarks section "Quilt import 
> comparison of Git and Mercurial" for the latest (OLS2006) benchmark
> by Mercurial.

Thanks for the hint!

BTW the tests in Clone/status/pull make sense, especially the "4 times slower on pull/merge". In my tests, merge-recur (the default merge strategy, which was written in Python, and is now in C) was substantially faster.

> Probably not indexed by Google, or doesn't have high pagerank because it 
> is in PDF and fairly new (therefore has low "citations" number).

I hope these posts boost the pagerank.

Ciao, Dscho