Subject: Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks

From: Chris Mason <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:52:23 -0400

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 
cache...data=ordered 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 ;)

-chris