RE: svn edit
From: Harvey, Edward <Edward.Harvey_at_patni.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:49:24 -0400
> Just to illustrate what I mean by "optimizing WC scans" and put some
I'm not sure what you mean by "with full caches" or "keep access more local" but I do know this -
Now - If svn is able to get anywhere near the 10 sec mark for 100,000 files, I say fine. But I seriously doubt svn will beat the performance of git by using the same strategy that git uses (walk the tree). This costs at least one order of magnitude in performance.
Put simply, as far as performance is concerned, Perforce has a strategy that beats the pants off either svn or git. Because perforce doesn't need to walk the tree.
This e-mail message may contain proprietary, confidential or legally privileged information for the sole use of the person or entity to whom this message was originally addressed. Any review, e-transmission dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error kindly delete this e-mail from your records. If it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without proper authority, please notify us immediately at netadmin_at_patni.com and delete this mail.
This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.