On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > Sure. But at this point the reference to compare GIT performance > against might be GIT itself. And while 1 second is really nice in this > case, there are some repos where it could be (and has already been > reported to be) much more. I'd still like to see the KDE repo, that thing went quiet after it was supposed to hit sneaker-net.. If it was 30 seconds before to do a "git log" for some individual file, after the recent optimizations it should hopefully be down to 10. And I agree that I might be more motivated to try to get it down further if I could just find a repository where it's that much. Right now I can can do a "git log" on any file in the kernel archive in under a second (well, when I say "any file", I started with a script, but with 22 thousand files I didn't bother to run it for all that long, so I ended up testing a few random files in addition to the first few hundred files of "git ls-files", and they are all well under a second). And that's without the "git diff --quiet" thing that is still in "next", and that cut down some of the overhead for other reasons (although I suspect the effect of that will be less when combined with my patches since the stuff it cut down I probably cut down even more). I really suspect you'll have a hard time beating "normal" git with the patches I sent out. I'm sure it's quite possible - don't get me wrong - I just suspect it won't be spectacular, and it will be a lot of work. Linus - 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