Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks

From: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 26, 2005, 15:09 UTC
Message-ID: <aec7e5c305042608095731d571@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <200504260713.26020.mason@suse.com>

On 4/26/05, Chris Mason <mason@suse.com> wrote:

> This agrees with my tests here, the time to apply patches is somewhat disk
> bound, even for the small 100 or 200 patch series.  The io should be coming
> from data=ordered, since the commits are still every 5 seconds or so.

Yes, as long as you apply the patches to disk that is. I've hacked up a small backend tool that applies patches to files kept in memory and uses a modifed rabin-karp search to match hunks. So you basically read once and write once per file instead of moving data around for each applied patch. But it needs two passes.

And no, the source code for the entire Linux kernel is not kept in memory - you need a smart frontend to manage the file cache. Drop me a line if you are interested.

/ magnus