5 ms·
I cannot judge whether the methodology makes sense, but the numbers seem quite impressive for my manager brain: > Readme.md For a RustBerlin meetup presenta
by rrr_oh_man 3y ago
I cannot judge whether the methodology makes sense, but the numbers seem quite impressive for my manager brain:
> Readme.md
For a RustBerlin meetup presentation I compared lazygit, tig and gitui by
parsing the entire Linux git repository (which contains over 900k commits):
| | Time | Memory (GB) | Binary (MB) | Freezes | Crashes |
| ------- | ---------- | ----------- | ----------- | --------- | --------- |
| gitui | 24 s | 0.17 | 1.4 | No | No |
| lazygit | 57 s | 2.6 | 16 | Yes | Sometimes |
| tig | 4 m 20 s | 1.3 | 0.6 | Sometimes | No |
- fbdab103 3y agoOn the other hand, I do not work on a repository nearly the size of Linux. If you evaluate performance on a more modest project, is there a meaningfully human speed difference? I will always take faster tools, but sometimes things are good enough.
- vrmiguel 3y agoI found the memory gains to be more enticing than the performance improvements
- no_carrier 3y agoThose memory figures relate to parsing the linux kernel repo, so the parent's question still remains, if it matters to the rest of us?