3 ms·
According to #mercurial, branches (even closed ones) begin to noticeably slow down the repository when you reach around 2000. That's not at all impossible to re
by fhd2 13y ago
According to #mercurial, branches (even closed ones) begin to noticeably slow down the repository when you reach around 2000. That's not at all impossible to reach with fine-grained feature branches. Bookmarks are really just pointers to commits, no branches in any sense, so they cannot be used for feature branches either. As a result, we simply don't use feature branches in Mercurial. It's literally the only issue I can think of.
- k_bx 13y agoWell, if that true, I'd prefer to investigate and make them fast, instead of using "bookmark-as-a-branch" because of all the cool stuff mercurial branches have (like great log-drawing with branch info).
- michal8181 13y agoNot true any longer. As described in http://mercurial.808500.n3.nabble.com/named-branches-vs-bookmarks-FUD-tp4006241p4006242.html http://mercurial.808500.n3.nabble.com/named-branches-vs-book... > We have users with thousands of named branches in production and have > done tests on up to 10k branches and the performance impact is fairly > minimal.