Piotr Krukowiecki venit, vidit, dixit 24.03.2011 08:40: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Piotr Krukowiecki > <piotr.krukowiecki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Michael J Gruber >> <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Piotr Krukowiecki venit, vidit, dixit 23.03.2011 15:43: >>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Michael J Gruber >>>> <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Piotr Krukowiecki venit, vidit, dixit 23.03.2011 14:23: >>>>>> Just some stats: >>>>>> >>>>>> git log --cherry-mark --left-right --oneline --date-order branch...trunk >>>>>> >>>>>> lists 1004 commits, takes about 20s and memory peaks to about 670MB >>>>>> twice during the run (I'm on linux with AMD Phenom II X4 945) >>>>>> >>>>>> With limit it prints X last commits (the limiting seems to take place after all >>>>>> work, on the output list only). >>>>>> >>>>>> branch..trunk is 551 commits, the other way is 453 commits. >>>>>> 710 commits are found to be "=", 98 "<", 196 ">". >>>>>> >>>>>> Note, I'm not saying it's too slow, or that it's working incorrectly, I'm just >>>>>> giving real-life stats if anyone was interested. >>>>>> I suspect such checks won't be done frequently. >>>>> >>>>> You don't need to say it's slow - I've said so already :( >>>>> >>>>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/169725 >>>> >>>> In the link above: >>>> git cherry A B: 0.4s >>>> git rev-list --cherry A...B: 1.7s >>>> >>>> So rev-list is 4.25x slower. >>>> >>>> In my case it's only 1.23x slower: >>>> >>>> $ time git rev-list --cherry branch...trunk > /tmp/rev-list >>>> real 0m18.627s >>>> user 0m17.710s >>>> sys 0m0.900s >>>> >>>> $ time git cherry branch trunk > /tmp/cherry >>>> real 0m15.345s >>>> user 0m14.310s >>>> sys 0m1.020s >>>> >>>> >>> >>> How's that with > /dev/null (or with --count for rev-list)? Also, how >>> many merge bases do you have: >>> >>> git merge-base --all branch trunk | wc -l >> >> I expect only one - there should be no merges between those two >> branches. >> >> I will do measurements tomorrow. > > > Branches might change a bit since yesterday so the exact numbers > might be a bit different. > > > $ time git cherry branch trunk > /dev/null > > real 0m15.246s > user 0m14.260s > sys 0m0.970s > > > $ time git rev-list --cherry branch...trunk > /dev/null > > real 0m18.801s > user 0m17.980s > sys 0m0.800s > > > $ time git rev-list --cherry --count branch...trunk > 556 > > real 0m18.825s > user 0m18.010s > sys 0m0.770s > > > $ time git merge-base --all branch trunk | wc -l > 2 > > real 0m0.538s > user 0m0.490s > sys 0m0.040s > > > I expected one merge base, but it appears our history is > seriously fscked, either by past svn operations or by > git-svn clone :) > > (I'm not saying there's an error somewhere, just that the > history is ... complicated) > > Thanks for the timings. In your case with only 2 merge bases, the merge base calculation (or rather: simplification) does not make much of a difference, at most 0.5s as we see. I'm still wondering where the rest of the 3.5s difference (between cherry and --cherry) is spent, but at least the ratio 18.8/15.2 is more bearable than in my case. Unfortunately, this confirms my suspicion that there is more than 1 area which would need improvement to match cherry's speed. Michael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html