Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks

From: Chris Mason
Date: Tue Apr 26 2005 - 14:53:23 EST

On Tuesday 26 April 2005 13:39, Chris Mason wrote:

> As an example, here's the time to apply 300 patches on ext3. This was with
> my packed patches applied, but vanilla git should show similar percentage
> differences.
> data=writeback 32s
> data=ordered 44s
> With a long enough test, data=ordered should fall into the noise, but 10-40
> second runs really show it.

I get much closer numbers if the patches directory is already in means more contention for the disk when trying to read
the patches.

If the patches are hot in the cache data=writeback and data=ordered both take
about 30s. You still see some writes in data=writeback, but these are mostly
async log commits.

The same holds true for vanilla git as well, although it needs 1m7s to apply
from a hot cache (sorry, couldn't resist the plug ;)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at