Bazaar performance

John Arbash Meinel john at
Fri May 16 19:40:00 BST 2008

Hash: SHA1

Charles Duffy wrote:
| That's /very/ counter to my experience at a former employer revisioning
| our own branch of the Gentoo portage tree. (Don't ask why we didn't use
| overlays -- I don't want to go into it now).
| The (then-experimental) packs branch of bzr outperformed both mercurial
| and git for the operations I tested; however, I was using local access
| only (no sftp involved); I don't think that the smart server was fully
| functional with packs at the time, but when this went to production,
| smart server access was in use.
| I suspect that you could get significantly different numbers with some
| tuning. I don't have the email I wrote up with my methodology and
| timings anymore -- though I think I may have sent it to rcollins at the
| time. (Robert -- or anyone -- if you've got it, go ahead and post; the
| folks I was worried about getting permission from at the time are no
| longer there).

The other thing I wonder about is whether running "bzr pack" to compact down the
repository would help. Right now we have some scaling issues as the number of
pack files increases. We are looking into it, but often a "bzr pack" makes
things noticeably faster.

It would, at least, be something to try.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the bazaar mailing list