Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261493AbVEOGYx (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2005 02:24:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261518AbVEOGYx (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2005 02:24:53 -0400 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:46271 "EHLO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261493AbVEOGYt (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2005 02:24:49 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 08:22:43 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Petr Baudis Cc: Matt Mackall , linux-kernel , git@vger.kernel.org, mercurial@selenic.com, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Mercurial 0.4e vs git network pull Message-ID: <20050515062243.GA22021@elte.hu> References: <20050512094406.GZ5914@waste.org> <20050512182340.GA324@pasky.ji.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050512182340.GA324@pasky.ji.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 787 Lines: 26 * Petr Baudis wrote: > > Mercurial is also much smarter than rsync at determining what > > outstanding changesets exist. Here's an empty pull as a demonstration: > > > > $ time hg merge hg://selenic.com/linux-hg/ > > retrieving changegroup > > > > real 0m0.363s > > user 0m0.083s > > sys 0m0.007s > > > > That's a single http request and a one line response. > > So, what about comparing it with something comparable, say git pull > over HTTP? :-) Matt, did you get around to do such a comparison? Ingo - 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/