Bazaar performance

[Andrew Cowie]

On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 11:33 -0500, Charles Duffy wrote:
> That's /very/ counter to my experience at ...

Yeah, I'd agree with Charles.

One of the things that everyone seems to grapple with is that initial
checkout time and outputting full history are not really all that
representative of normal ongoing "day-to-day" operation. The people that
hack on bzr have been very focused at fine tuning those aspects, like
merge performance and incremental data exchange - things that are what
you actually depend on when using the tool.

[To that end, what we probably need is an objective benchmark with a
large branch-heavy history that evaluates merge times and such; I think
you would find that Bazaar compares very favourably indeed in commit,
merge and pull performance at steady state]

Given the way that bzr keeps getting beat up over initial checkout time
and `log` output, you'd think that the people working on it and hoping
to see if successfully advocated would be crash-priority focused on
making these pain points go away for ever.

That aside, our experience *using* bzr has otherwise been mostly
positive, and we continue to recommend it.

AfC
Sydney

-- 
Andrew Frederick Cowie

Operational Dynamics is an operations and engineering consultancy
focusing on IT strategy, organizational architecture, systems
review, and effective procedures for change management. We actively
carry out research and development in these areas on behalf of our
clients, and enable successful use of open source in their mission
critical enterprises, worldwide.

http://www.operationaldynamics.com/

Sydney   New York   Toronto   London
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20080517/3a587e6b/attachment.pgp