On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 09:54:50AM +1200, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On 11 Jun 2007 05:04:51 -0400, linux@xxxxxxxxxxx <linux@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It seems to be common knowledge that git is a heck of a lot faster than > > CVS at most operations, but I'd like to do a little evangelizing and > > I can't seem to find a benchmark to support that claim. > > It _will_ be a bit of an apple-to-oranges comparison, but you could > use a few large-ish projects that have a published GIT gateway. > Measure time and bw use of > > - cvs co vs git clone On the Git side, give breakdowns of the time for cloning with --bare (git-fetch) and the separate actual checkout time. Also compare the effects of shallow clones. > - cvs update vs git pull Again, do both the git-fetch and git-merge portions. > - cvs log (at top level) vs git log cvs history vs. git log might be more appropriate in the top level sense. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Council Member E-Mail : robbat2@xxxxxxxxxx GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Attachment:
pgpsVa1DELoV3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
