Bazaar

Bazaar

 




Wiki Tools

  • Login
  • Create Profile
  • Find Page
  • Recent Changes
  • Page History
  • Attachments

Bazaar 2.0 Benchmarking Results

Bazaar 2.0.0 vs Mercurial 1.3.1 Efficiency

Note that Bazaar Import represents server-side repository overhead for all branches imported while Bazaar Trunk represents client-side repository+branch+tree overhead for the trunk branch. See how we tested.

Project

Mercurial

Bazaar Import

Bazaar Trunk

Firefox 3.5

311 MB

137 MB

147 MB

Xen 3.4-testing

128 MB

63 MB

65 MB

MoinMoin Wiki 1.8

82 MB

55 MB

56 MB

Thunderbird 2.0

53 MB

23 MB

24 MB

PIDA IDE

11 MB

3.8 MB

4.0 MB

Summary: The Bazaar 2.0 repository format is more efficient than Mercurial 1.3's and often by a substantial amount.

Bazaar 2.0.0 vs Git 1.6.3.3 Efficiency

Note that Bazaar Import represents server-side repository overhead for all branches imported while Bazaar Trunk represents client-side repository+branch+tree overhead for the trunk branch. See how we tested.

Project

Git

Bazaar Import

Bazaar Trunk

Samba

203 MB

353 MB

29 MB

Amarok

53 MB

57 MB

58 MB

X server

34 MB

41 MB

31 MB

Ruby on Rails

25 MB

23 MB

23 MB

dbus

8.7 MB

7.5 MB

7.1 MB

(The Samba figures are certainly weird. We're looking into it.)

Summary: The Bazaar 2.0 repository format is competitive with Git 1.6. On the majority of projects, users are unlikely to notice the difference either way.

Other comparisons - 2009

  • 2009-08-16 Benchmark of Bzr 1.17, Hg 1.3.1, Git 1.6.3.3 by Jari Aalto. Summary: Git: Numbers speak fom themselves; Hg: slow network performance; Bzr: Gap to Hg leveled, branching as fast as in Git, disk space efficient.

  • 2009-01-19 DVCS Round-Up: One System to Rule Them All by Robert Fendt . Summary: SVK: disk space hog, horrendously slow; darcs: disk space hog, scales badly; Monotone: emphasis on security;Bazaar: Jack of All Trades; Mercurial: speedy; Git: The Speed King,

Other comparisons - 2008