git status takes 30 seconds on Windows 7. Here are some stats:
git ls-files | wc -l
27330
git ls-files -o | wc -l
4
$ git diff --name-only | xargs du -chs
68K update_import_contacts.php
68K total
What can I do??? This is so slow it is unbearable.
By the way i've done git gc several
On 03/27/2013 05:39 PM, Jim Kinsman wrote:
git status takes 30 seconds on Windows 7. Here are some stats:
git ls-files | wc -l
27330
git ls-files -o | wc -l
4
$ git diff --name-only | xargs du -chs
68K update_import_contacts.php
68K total
What can I do??? This is so slow it
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 11:39:31 -0500
Jim Kinsman jakins...@gmail.com wrote:
git status takes 30 seconds on Windows 7. Here are some stats:
[...]
What can I do??? This is so slow it is unbearable.
By the way i've done git gc several times and nothing changed.
You could try some voodoo [1] or
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:39:31AM -0500, Jim Kinsman wrote:
git status takes 30 seconds on Windows 7. Here are some stats:
git ls-files | wc -l
27330
git ls-files -o | wc -l
4
$ git diff --name-only | xargs du -chs
68K update_import_contacts.php
68K total
What can I do???
The only anti-virus I have installed is Microsoft Security Essentials
I turned off and it was still the same:
$ cat /usr/bin/gitstatus
start_time=`date +%s`
git status echo run time is $(expr `date +%s` - $start_time) s
$ gitstatus
# On branch test
# Changes not staged for commit:
# (use git
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 06:46:57PM +, John Keeping wrote:
I think the simple reality is that Git was written with the assumption
that stat is cheap and that isn't really the case on Windows, where the
filesystem cache doesn't seem to do that well with this.
Yes, I think that's pretty much
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
Yes, I think that's pretty much the case (though most of my
Git-on-Windows experience is from cygwin long ago, where the stat
performance was truly horrendous). Have you tried setting
core.preloadindex, which should run the
Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org writes:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
Yes, I think that's pretty much the case (though most of my
Git-on-Windows experience is from cygwin long ago, where the stat
performance was truly horrendous). Have you
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Given that we haven't tweaked the parallelism or thread-cost
parameters since the inception of the mechanism in Nov 2008, I
suspect that we would see praises from some and grievances from
other corners of the user base
9 matches
Mail list logo
