Re: Some git performance measurements..
- From
Mike Ralphson <mike.ralphson@gmail.com>
- Date
- Dec 7, 2007, 19:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <e2b179460712071115k369dddcatb0f6456d0028acbb@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712071816100.27959@racer.site>
On Dec 7, 2007 6:37 PM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
Show 18 quoted lines
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Mike Ralphson wrote: > > > On Dec 7, 2007 1:49 PM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote: > > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Mike Ralphson wrote: > > > > > > > I benchmarked 3 alternative qsorts, qsortG [2] was the fastest on my > > > > system but has funky licensing, the NetBSD qsort was middle-range > > > > and the glibc one the slowest of the three (but that could be due to > > > > it being tuned for a "Sun 4/260"). All of them show over 100x speed > > > > improvements on a git-status of my main repo (104s -> ~0.7s) > > > > > Okay, sorry, I did not bother reading further when I read "You may use it > in anything you like;". > > But if the author did not respond, it might be a better idea to just > reimplement it. >
I've just tried the mergesort implementation as used in msysgit and that performs faster for me. It's simpler, and compatibly licensed. It looks good.
Mike