From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1278 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2010 13:14:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 1266 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2010 13:14:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp3.ugent.be (HELO smtp3.UGent.be) (157.193.49.127) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:14:03 +0000 Received: from localhost (mcheck2.ugent.be [157.193.49.249]) by smtp3.UGent.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386A314787F; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:14:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp3.UGent.be ([157.193.49.127]) by localhost (mcheck2.ugent.be [157.193.43.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WzWo2YIriP9o; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:14:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.elis.ugent.be (mail.elis.UGent.be [157.193.206.48]) by smtp3.UGent.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C3C8147855; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:14:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.elis.ugent.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41285918F19; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:14:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.elis.ugent.be ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.elis.ugent.be [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dDWQpXpEurwX; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:13:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from bigmac.elis.UGent.be (bigmac.elis.UGent.be [157.193.206.33]) by mail.elis.ugent.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54E7918F10; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:13:56 +0100 (CET) Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb@sourceware.org Message-Id: From: Jonas Maebe To: Phil Muldoon In-Reply-To: <4B472BDC.1030301@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Subject: Re: time to be serious about dropping CVS Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 13:14:00 -0000 References: <20100101080137.GP2788@adacore.com> <4B472BDC.1030301@redhat.com> X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 4B472F98.000/157.193.206.48/mail.elis.UGent.be/mail.elis.ugent.be/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 4B472F98.000 on smtp3.UGent.be : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-01/txt/msg00064.txt.bz2 On 08 Jan 2010, at 13:58, Phil Muldoon wrote: > I don't know why CVS is so slow. Whether it is CPU bound on the > sourceware machine, or the bandwidth at the hosting site is at > capacity .. who knows? I'm not even sure how to find out. But would > SVN solve any of the problem relating to performance? Probably, yes. CVS does virtually everything on the server. A cvs diff sends a full copy of every potentially modified local file (i.e., those of which the time stamp has changed) to the remote server, the server diffs it, and then sends a diff back to the client. Similarly, when you commit then a complete copy of all potentially modified local files is sent to the server, instead of only a diff, and the server has to create a diff. In case of svn, all the diff'ing is done on the client side and the client only ever sends diffs to the server (of actually modified files). Of course, git can do even more on the client side. Jonas