Changes between Version 48 and Version 49 of DarcsEvaluation


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jul 26, 2008 1:32:36 PM (7 years ago)
Author:
batterseapower
Comment:

Benchmark figures

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • DarcsEvaluation

    v48 v49  
    504504
    505505To be able to use all the commands in the example above, you should create a .hgrc file in your home directory, looking something like this:
     506
     507
     508
    506509{{{
    507510[extensions]
     
    583586 * Cherry-picking isn't very "native" to the data model. Support for this is very poor.
    584587 * UI is rather different from darcs (which current contributors are used to).
     588
     589=== Benchmarks ===
     590
     591These benchmark figures were obtained with a warm disk cache on a clean tree, using OS X 10.5:
     592
     593||     ||Annotate||Log   ||Status||Clone   ||
     594||Git  ||0.936s  ||0.523s||0.030s||0.580s  ||
     595||Hg   ||0.230s  ||3.772s||0.178s||9.455s  ||
     596||Bzr  ||2.131s  ||7.278s||0.312s||49.788s ||
     597||Darcs||47.080s*||2.115s||0.053s||28.276**||
     598
     599Footnotes:
     600
     601* {{{darcs annotate}}} fails with {{{Stack space overflow: current size 8388608 bytes.}}}, so you don't get an answer
     602
     603** {{{darcs get}}} fails with {{{Unapplicable patch}}} due to the case-insensitivity of HFS+, so you don't get a clone
     604
     605The Bzr clone time is high because it does an actual copy rather than just using hard links, by design. However, even on the other commands it seems to be about twice as slow as Hg, which is on average somewhat slower than Git.
     606
     607Note that this is a very limited benchmark: it doesn't even test merging / pulling or the cost of cloning over a network.
    585608
    586609== Eliminated alternatives ==