3 ms·
This is older than git 1.9, but git supports mercurial repositories[1]. I used to have to use mercurial to deal with kiln (which couldn't convert our repo to gi
by herge 13y ago
This is older than git 1.9, but git supports mercurial repositories[1]. I used to have to use mercurial to deal with kiln (which couldn't convert our repo to git), but now I happily work with git and everything is 10 times faster.
[1]: https://felipec.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/git-remote-hg-bzr-2/ https://felipec.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/git-remote-hg-bzr-2...
- akxak 13y agoWhen was the last time you used Mercurial? Git being 10 times faster seems dated. Especially if you're using Facebook's fabulous Mercurial extensions, which actually make Mercurial faster than Git. https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-mercurial-at-facebook/ https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-merc...
- stuhood 13y agoThere are no version numbers in those benchmarks, nor any way to reproduce them. So take them with a few grains of salt. In particular, how old was the version of git they were testing with? Were they using SSDs?
- barbs 13y agoI'm curious: where does this 10x speed increase come from? are you implying that git is inherently faster than mercurial? I've not actually used mercurial myself so I wouldn't know...
- herge 13y agogit status is 10 times faster on my machine for the same repository than hg status.