Re: Perforce/Subversion Timing Statistics #2

On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 12:28:59PM -0600, Joshua Jensen wrote:
> This test handles 10x as many files in the repository. It is an example
> of how the numbers scale with growing lists of files.
>
> All operations are performed using the following directory using a BRAND
> NEW repository on an Athlon 1.4ghz Windows XP Professional machine with
> 7200 rpm hard drives and 512 mb RAM and 98% CPU time available. The
> Perforce statistics are using the free Perforce 2-user server available
> on their website.

One advantage (or disadvantage depending on your perspective), is that
perforce retains all working copy metadata on the server end. So the
server "knows" where the client sits. If you edit a file, you tell the
server. So everything can be deduced without any transfer of data from
the client to the server.

This is good for obvious performance gains. Not to mention that the
server can gain more statistics and information on the clients (for
administration purposes, this is a win). However, it is extrememly
costly for the client to validate itself. If you need to compare your
working copy against what the server thinks you have, you are looking at
a good bit of time and cpu consumption.

So, IMO, your tests are really missing the whole picture. Sure, Perforce
can win on key command sequences. However, in the end, the overall
performance of Subversion is likely better, taking into account the less
costly maint. of a working copy. For large repositories, this is
critical.

-- 
Debian     - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://linux1394.sourceforge.net/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
Deqo       - http://www.deqo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org