[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Abolishing ChangeLog files

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Re: Abolishing ChangeLog files
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 19:58:58 +0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4

On 29.03.2013 19:36, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
It's ~/.bzr.log, not ~/bazaar/.bzr.log.

Ah, it works fine, then. Thanks.

Thank you. It inspired me to run the same non-interactive tests you did,
and indeed the full 'git log lisp\progmodes\ruby-mode.el > NUL'
invocation is non-instantaneous every time, and it's on the same order
of magnitude as 'bzr log', although the latter takes twice as long:

emacs-git-savannah>timep git log lisp\progmodes\ruby-mode.el > NUL

real    00h00m04.652s
user    00h00m00.000s
sys     00h00m00.015s

emacs-bzr\trunk>timep bzr log lisp\progmodes\ruby-mode.el > NUL

real    00h00m08.269s
user    00h00m07.878s
sys     00h00m00.280s

But! Git starts streaming output just as soon as it can, hence my
earlier impression that the command is instantaneous.

That only matters if you want the first few revisions.  What if you
want the last?

The most recent revisions are streamed first (they're at the top), and they are usually the ones I need. If I want the last, I can at least do some reading and scrolling while they're being retrieved.

And you shouldn't underestimate the perception of being instantaneous. If you were looking for a reason why people think that Bazaar is too slow, this one's a very plausible culprit.

  > I did, just now: (...)

I tried it, too, and here Git wins hands-down.

Here's how long it takes to update both when they are already up-to-date
(staging a situation when they're the same number of revisions
out-of-date is harder):

emacs-git-savannah>timep git pull
Already up-to-date.

real    00h00m02.139s
user    00h00m00.000s
sys     00h00m00.031s

emacs-bzr\trunk>timep bzr update
Дерево в актуальной ревизии 112180 ветви

real    00h00m09.963s
user    00h00m00.343s
sys     00h00m00.202s

So you wasted the whole of 7 sec to know that your tree is up to
date.  Big deal!

You can reply "big deal" to almost any speed comparison. But yes, Bazaar took 7 seconds longer and, measuring relatively, was 4 times slower. It's annoying, and it gives a bad impression.

And it's even slower when there's actually stuff to update.

Before that, I updated this Bazaar clone from a several-days-old
revision, and it took 4 minutes.

Your network needs an urgent upgrade.

My bandwidth definitely exceeds the connection speeds reported by Bazaar when it's doing its thing.

I don't have a similar result for Git
to compare, but considering it cloned the whole history in 30 minutes
(same as on your machine)

You are mistaken, a full clone took me 3 hours, not 30 min.

I misremembered, then. But it definitely took me 30 minutes today to make a new clone of git://git.savannah.gnu.org/emacs.

I guess that means that my network is fine. You, on the other hand, may be hitting a bottleneck there. This could explain why network operations of Git and Bazaar take the same time on your machine.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]