From: Thomas Glanzmann <sithglan@stud.uni-erlangen.de>
To: Florian Weimer <fw@DENEB.ENYO.DE>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
magnus.damm@gmail.com, mason@suse.com, mike.taht@timesys.com,
mpm@selenic.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:13:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050427151357.GH1087@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871x8wb6w4.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
Hello,
> Directory hashing has a negative impact on some applications (notably
> tar and unpatched mutt on large Maildir folders). For git, it's a win
> because hashing destroys locality anyway.
this is inaccurate. Actually turning on directory hashing speeds-up big
maildirs a lot (tested with mutt-1.5.4 and higher with a maildir
containing 30thousand messages). But in the mutt case you also have the
header cache[1] which speeds up a lot - with or without hashed
directories. See also MEs comment[2] on this.
For tar I have no idea why it should slow down the operation, but maybe
you can enlighten us.
Thomas
[1] http://wwwcip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~sithglan/mutt/
- wait till TLR has released mutt-1.5.10
- use mutt CVS HEAD
- use mutt-1.5.9 + http://wwwcip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~sithglan/mutt/mutt-cvs-header-cache.29
- and put the following in your .muttrc:
set header_cache=/tmp/login-hcache
set maildir_header_cache_verify=no
[2] http://www.advogato.org/person/scandal/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-27 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 119+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-26 0:41 Mercurial 0.3 vs git benchmarks Matt Mackall
2005-04-26 1:49 ` Daniel Phillips
2005-04-26 2:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 2:30 ` Mike Taht
2005-04-26 3:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 4:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 11:13 ` Chris Mason
2005-04-26 15:09 ` Magnus Damm
2005-04-26 15:38 ` Chris Mason
2005-04-26 16:23 ` Magnus Damm
2005-04-26 18:18 ` Chris Mason
2005-04-26 20:56 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-26 21:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 22:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-04-26 22:56 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-26 23:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-04-27 15:01 ` Florian Weimer
2005-04-27 15:13 ` Thomas Glanzmann [this message]
2005-04-27 18:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-04-27 19:01 ` Thomas Glanzmann
2005-04-27 19:57 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-04-27 20:06 ` Thomas Glanzmann
2005-04-27 20:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-04-27 20:39 ` Thomas Glanzmann
2005-04-27 20:47 ` Florian Weimer
2005-04-27 20:55 ` Florian Weimer
2005-04-27 21:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-04-27 21:06 ` Florian Weimer
2005-04-27 21:32 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-04-27 19:55 ` Theodore Ts'o
2005-04-27 6:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-27 21:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-04-27 21:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 16:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 17:39 ` Chris Mason
2005-04-26 19:52 ` Chris Mason
2005-04-26 18:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-04-26 20:30 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-04-26 16:11 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-04-26 4:01 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-26 4:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-26 4:09 ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-04-26 4:22 ` Andreas Gal
2005-04-26 4:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 6:01 ` Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark Matt Mackall
2005-04-29 6:40 ` Sean
2005-04-29 7:40 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-29 8:40 ` Sean
2005-04-29 14:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 15:18 ` Morten Welinder
2005-04-29 16:52 ` Matt Mackall
2005-05-02 16:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-05-02 19:02 ` Sean
2005-05-02 22:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-02 22:30 ` Matt Mackall
2005-05-02 22:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-03 0:00 ` Matt Mackall
2005-05-03 2:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-03 3:29 ` Matt Mackall
2005-05-03 4:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-03 4:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-03 4:27 ` Matt Mackall
2005-05-03 8:45 ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-04-29 15:44 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 15:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 17:34 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 17:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 18:08 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 18:33 ` Sean
2005-04-29 18:54 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 19:13 ` Sean
2005-04-29 19:22 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 19:28 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 19:47 ` Noel Maddy
2005-04-29 19:54 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 20:13 ` Andrew Timberlake-Newell
2005-04-29 20:26 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-29 20:57 ` Andrew Timberlake-Newell
2005-04-29 20:16 ` Morgan Schweers
2005-04-29 20:21 ` Noel Maddy
2005-04-29 20:42 ` git network protocol David Lang
2005-04-29 21:15 ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-04-29 20:44 ` Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark Tom Lord
2005-04-29 21:57 ` Denys Duchier
2005-04-29 20:29 ` Signed commit vulnerabilities? (was: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark) Kevin Smith
2005-04-29 21:45 ` Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark Horst von Brand
2005-05-02 21:06 ` Tom Lord
2005-05-03 0:24 ` Kevin Smith
2005-05-02 16:15 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-04-29 16:37 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-29 17:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 19:12 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-29 19:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 20:23 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-29 20:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-29 21:20 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-29 16:46 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-04-29 20:19 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-04-29 22:30 ` Olivier Galibert
2005-04-29 22:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-04-29 20:30 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-04-29 20:39 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-30 2:52 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-04-30 15:20 ` Matt Mackall
2005-04-30 16:37 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-05-02 15:49 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-05-02 16:14 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2005-05-03 17:40 ` Bill Davidsen
2005-05-04 2:10 ` Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark (/usr/bin/env again) David A. Wheeler
2005-05-02 16:17 ` Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark Andrea Arcangeli
2005-05-02 16:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-02 17:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-05-02 17:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-02 18:17 ` Edgar Toernig
2005-05-02 20:54 ` Sam Ravnborg
2005-05-02 17:20 ` Ryan Anderson
2005-05-02 17:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-05-02 21:17 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-05-03 17:43 ` Bill Davidsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050427151357.GH1087@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de \
--to=sithglan@stud.uni-erlangen.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=fw@DENEB.ENYO.DE \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=mason@suse.com \
--cc=mike.taht@timesys.com \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.