On 10 March 2014 11:07, Dennis Luehring <dl.so...@gmx.net> wrote:
> according to these blog posts
> mercurial "can" be faster then git
> but i don't found any reply from the git community if it is a real problem
> or if there a ongoing (maybe git 2.0) changes to compete better in this case
They mailed the list about performance issues in git. From what I saw
there was relatively little feedback.
I had the impression, and I would not be surprised if they had the
impression that the git development community is relatively
unconcerned about performance issues on larger repositories.
There have been other reports, which are difficult to keep track of
without a bug tracking system, but the ones I know of are:
Poor performance of git status with large number of excluded files and
Poor performance, and breakage, on repositories with very large
numbers of files in them. (Rebase for instance will break if you
rebase a commit that contains a *lot* of files.)
Poor performance in protocol layer (and other places) with repos with
large numbers of refs. (Maybe this is fixed, not sure.)
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html