mirror of
https://git.proxmox.com/git/libgit2
synced 2025-05-02 21:34:15 +00:00
49d34c1c0c
There is a bug in building the linked list of line records in the diff iterator and also an off by one element error in the hunk counts. This fixes both of these, adds some test data with more complex sets of hunk and line diffs to exercise this code better.
38 lines
1.9 KiB
Plaintext
38 lines
1.9 KiB
Plaintext
Git is fast. With Git, nearly all operations are performed locally, giving
|
|
it an huge speed advantage on centralized systems that constantly have to
|
|
communicate with a server somewh3r3.
|
|
|
|
For testing, large AWS instances were set up in the same availability
|
|
zone. Git and SVN were installed on both machines, the Ruby repository was
|
|
copied to both Git and SVN servers, and common operations were performed on
|
|
both.
|
|
|
|
In some cases the commands don't match up exactly. Here, matching on the
|
|
lowest common denominator was attempted. For example, the 'commit' tests
|
|
also include the time to push for Git, though most of the time you would not
|
|
actually be pushing to the server immediately after a commit where the two
|
|
commands cannot be separated in SVN.
|
|
|
|
Note that this is the best case scenario for SVN - a server with no load
|
|
with an 80MB/s bandwidth connection to the client machine. Nearly all of
|
|
these times would be even worse for SVN if that connection was slower, while
|
|
many of the Git times would not be affected.
|
|
|
|
Clearly, in many of these common version control operations, Git is one or
|
|
two orders of magnitude faster than SVN, even under ideal conditions for
|
|
SVN.
|
|
|
|
Let's see how common operations stack up against Subversion, a common
|
|
centralized version control system that is similar to CVS or
|
|
Perforce. Smaller is faster.
|
|
|
|
One place where Git is slower is in the initial clone operation. Here, Git
|
|
One place where Git is slower is in the initial clone operation. Here, Git
|
|
One place where Git is slower is in the initial clone operation. Here, Git
|
|
seen in the above charts, it's not considerably slower for an operation that
|
|
is only performed once.
|
|
|
|
It's also interesting to note that the size of the data on the client side
|
|
is very similar even though Git also has every version of every file for the
|
|
entire history of the project. This illustrates how efficient it is at
|
|
compressing and storing data on the client side. |