Hi Stefan, Stefan Sperling writes: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:55:27PM -0400, Mark Phippard wrote: >> I could just be basing it on the original proposal. Maybe that planted the >> seed with me that it was going to be faster: >> >> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2010-07/0154.shtml > > The proposal says: > > "it currently performs significantly better than `svnsync` because it > doesn't need to touch the filesystem or apply any deltas." > > I would guess this benefit is probably only measurable with file:// URLs.
Yes, I recall initially comparing their performances with file:// URLs, but that was a long time ago. It's possible that svnsync is equally fast now. And yes, today's concerns are related to the usecase of importing from/ exporting into Git: so, for feedback-driven-optimization, we'll need to develop a new benchmark. Thanks. -- Ram
