Re: Kernel SCM saga..

[Martin Pool]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/