On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 05:09:14PM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:32:56AM -0400, Nathan Gray wrote:
> > I ran a benchmark of darcs-2.4.93.3 against a darcs-2 format copy
> > of my cap repo, which is the one I used to do the darcs-1
> > benchmarks earlier this year.  The results are included at the
> > end of this message.  I am also including the results of my
> > original darcs-1 benchmark.
> 
> So to break down, it seems to me:
> - whatsnew and pull 1000 are faster with darcs 2
> - record, revert, unrevert are about the same
> - pull 100, check, repair are faster with darcs 1
> 
> - darcs 2 full get is slower and lazy get is faster than darcs 1 get
> 
> Also it seems that darcs 2 is quite memory-hungry compared to darcs 1.
> 
> Could you maybe share the output of "darcs chan --from-tag . --count"? The
> record times seem quite exorbitant to me... Maybe also
> "find -maxdepth 1 -type f | wc -l" and "find -type f | wc -l"

The 'darcs changes' command took a couple of minutes to run and
used large amounts of memory.

  $ darcs chan --from-tag . --count
  6

  $ find -maxdepth 1 -type f | wc -l
  1

  $ find -maxdepth 1 -type d | wc -l
  36

  find -type f | wc -l
  64296

-kolibrie

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users

Reply via email to