1.13 vs 1.14rc1 performance summary
John Arbash Meinel
john at arbash-meinel.com
Tue Apr 14 14:11:01 BST 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Ian Clatworthy wrote:
> See the attached. There's clearly a bit of noise creeping
> in now and then so I ran the benchmark twice. All runs
> are using 1.9 format.
> In summary:
> * send and log are faster
> * branch is probably faster (but branching outside a shared
> repo is still terribly, terribly slow on large projects)
> * nothing else (in the scope of the benchmark) has obviously
> Ian C.
Branch:shared 11.0 6.1 24.4 9.4 bzr branch $... fix
I'm really happy to see this, I'm guessing it is the "iter_files_bytes"
Add:commit 5.3 1.1 1.9 2.5 bzr commit -m "testing add"
Somethingvery strange going on here, given that the former sped up by
almost 4x, but the latter slowed down.
Change:commit 0.9 1.0 1.9 7.6 bzr commit -m ...
Tag:tag 0.2 5.7 0.2 0.5 bzr tag BETA-1
Something to be aware of. I don't know if this is genuine or not. 1.9 =>
7.6 is pretty serious, as is 0.2 => 5.7.
Bundle:send 23.9 1.2 7.1 2.6 bzr send -o zzzBundle.path
23.9s => 1.2.. I know there were a couple of improvements here,do you
think these are genuine? I guess emacs has a *very* long mainline, so it
might be possible. I don't think emacs has a much larger number of commit
In a very strange twist, with the second run:
Branch:shared 11.9 7.7 9.5 16.1 bzr branch $... fix
Suddenly we go *up*...
So I guess we just need to take these with a bit of skepticism. I wonder
if there would be a way to clean up the results a bit. Maybe calling
'sync' between actions?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the bazaar