[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Moving to bzr?
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: Moving to bzr? |
Date: |
Mon, 05 Jan 2009 12:50:51 +0900 |
Eli Zaretskii writes:
> Is "bzr pull" the equivalent of "cvs up -d"? That is, is that the
> command to resync with the master repository? Because if it is, it is
> slower than CVS by a large margin (but so is git's 3 min, so I assume
> "bzr pull" is not the equivalent of "cvs up -d").
Are you testing on Windows? git has historically had performance
problems on Windows because its Unix-oriented optimizations are often
pessimizations on Windows. Like other posters, I've never seen a git
pull longer than 30 seconds (Mac OS X) or 15(!) on GNU/Linux, some of
which updated more than 100 objects (maybe nearly 1000) because I
don't do it often.
In terms of effect on the working directory, "bzr pull" is indeed the
equivalent of cvs up -d, but the implementation is quite different.
I believe that there are important improvements to pull that will be
in bzr 1.11 or 1.12 (so within two months), but they may require a
repo format upgrade.
- Moving to bzr?, dhruva, 2009/01/04
- Re: Moving to bzr?, David Reitter, 2009/01/04
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Karl Fogel, 2009/01/04
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Christian Faulhammer, 2009/01/04
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/01/04
- Re: Moving to bzr?,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/01/04
- Re: Moving to bzr?, dhruva, 2009/01/05
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/01/05
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/01/05
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Chetan Pandya, 2009/01/05
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Richard M Stallman, 2009/01/06
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Paul R, 2009/01/06
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/01/06
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Will Farrington, 2009/01/06
- Re: Moving to bzr?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/01/05