bazaar performance with single large project and a comparison with?git / mercurial

[Stefan Monnier]

> The unfortunate thing here is not so much Bazaar's performance per
> se in my option.  Before Git, nobody really cared about benchmarking
> VCS'es.  Well, at least this has become *much* more popular since
> then.

Don't about the general truth of it, but in my case I usually don't care
much about performance, indeed.  E.g. I don't bother to benchmark CVS
against Bzr.  I just know that I use a Bzr branch for Emacs as well as
the main CVS repository and that occasionally I try to do a "bzr
annotate" on the Bzr checkout and get tired of waiting, switch to the
CVS checkout, run the "cvs annotate" there and ... the CVS annotate
still finishes before Bzr, despite Bzr's headstart.
Same for "diff -r submit:".

For pull/diff/commit, Bzr is fast enough for me (the initial checkout
is slow, but it's not like I've had to do it more than once).

But when I need to investigate the history of a piece of code,
I basically need:
- bzr annotate
- from that output, figure out the rev where the lines where introduced.
- bzr diff and bzr log to see the corresponding change and log message.
- if the patch isn't actually the source of the code (e.g. it just
  reindents or makes some such unrelated change), I go back to
  "annotate" to figure out the previous commit, ...

[ BTW, I wish there was a command "bzr log-and-diff --lines N..M FILE"
  which would do just the above.
  See https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/202331 ]

Each one of those commands takes in the order of 1-2minutes.  I already
found it slow with CVS, which made me avoid doing that as much as
I could, with Bzr this is way worse.

> Fact is that even Bazaar is fast enough for >90% of the
> projects out there.

I do not dispute this statement.


        Stefan