Re: Receiving objects: 44% (121381/272167), 124.05 MiB | 78 KiB/s

[Joe Shaw <joe joeshaw org>]

Hi,

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Simos Xenitellis
<simos lists googlemail com> wrote:
> The comparison between svn.gnome.org and git.gnome.org is two-fold,
>
> 1. It shows that with svn.gnome.org, developers from Europe have been
> spoiled with very fast checkouts,
> thus they are likely to consider git clones to be slow in any case.

Interestingly, I am on Comcast in Cambridge, MA, USA and git.gnome.org
has twice the ping time as well:

PING svn.gnome.org (91.189.93.3): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 91.189.93.3: icmp_seq=0 ttl=48 time=86.194 ms
64 bytes from 91.189.93.3: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=83.672 ms
64 bytes from 91.189.93.3: icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=94.215 ms
64 bytes from 91.189.93.3: icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=86.731 ms
64 bytes from 91.189.93.3: icmp_seq=4 ttl=48 time=86.210 ms

PING git.gnome.org (209.132.176.202): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 209.132.176.202: icmp_seq=0 ttl=48 time=165.540 ms
64 bytes from 209.132.176.202: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=165.327 ms
64 bytes from 209.132.176.202: icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=165.998 ms
64 bytes from 209.132.176.202: icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=163.998 ms
64 bytes from 209.132.176.202: icmp_seq=4 ttl=48 time=165.434 ms

(This is a fraction of a longer run; the times are pretty steady.)

More samples from contributors would be necessary to say definitively,
but it would seem as though svn.g.o has a "better" net connection than
git.g.o.  If the size of git downloads is pretty uniformly larger than
svn's (we know it is for initial checkouts, I'm not sure about
updates) then we're taking a hit from both sides and the pain is
compounded.

Joe