Messages in this thread | | | From | Martin Pool <> | Subject | Re: Kernel SCM saga.. | Date | Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:26:03 +1000 |
| |
On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:47:27 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> The operations that are already done are pretty fast: ~60s to import a >> kernel tree, ~10s to import a new revision from a patch. > > By "importing", are you saying that importing all 60,000+ changesets of > the current kernel tree took only 60 seconds?
Now that would be impressive.
No, I mean this:
% bzcat ../linux.pkg/patch-2.5.14.bz2| patch -p1
% time bzr add -v . (find any new non-ignored files; deleted files automatically noticed) 6.06s user 0.41s system 89% cpu 7.248 total
% time bzr commit -v -m 'import 2.5.14' 7.71s user 0.71s system 65% cpu 12.893 total
(OK, a bit slower in this case but it wasn't all in core.)
This is only v0.0.3, but I think the interface simplicity and speed compares well.
I haven't tested importing all 60,000+ changesets of the current bk tree, partly because I don't *have* all those changesets. (Larry said previously that someone (not me) tried to pull all of them using bkclient, and he considered this abuse and blacklisted them.)
I have been testing pulling in release and rc patches, and it scales to that level. It probably could not handle 60,000 changesets yet, but there is a plan to get there. In the interim, although it cannot handle the whole history forever it can handle large trees with moderate numbers of commits -- perhaps as many as you might deal with in developing a feature over a course of a few months.
The most sensible place to try out bzr, if people want to, is as a way to keep your own revisions before mailing a patch to linus or the subsystem maintainer.
-- Martin
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |