[Mono-dev] Mono performance rocks!
pablosantosluac at terra.es
Thu Feb 1 14:13:52 EST 2007
Well, both IO performance and design play a role, but what I think is
important is pointing that using Mono/C# is not a handicap to achieve good
About svn vs git or mercurial: well, svn (like Plastic) is centralized.
AFAIK git is distributed, so no central rep is used. It has its advantages,
but is also not appropiate in many environments. And they can implement many
operations by just "copying" files (no network operations are required).
Another good poing in .NET/Mono is that we are using Remoting for data
transmission, and it is proving to be very, very efficient.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paolo Molaro" <lupus at ximian.com>
To: <mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Mono performance rocks!
> On 02/01/07 pablosantosluac wrote:
>> We also checked with a much less powerful server: 1'8Ghz Pentium IV with
>> 512Mb RAM
>> -> Plastic -> 20s
>> -> Subversion -> 38s
>> We added a 40 Mb file to the rep
>> -> Plastic -> 24s
>> -> Subversion -> 52 s
>> BTW, we run the tests several times to confirm the results.
>> So, yes, you can beat C written apps on Mono! :-)
> Note that in those cases the design of the app plays a role much bigger
> than the implementation language. Besides svn is known for being one of
> the slowest systems, so you might want to compare with either Mercurial
> or Git. In any case, if you have performance issues that show up in mono
> that don't show up on .net, please let us know so we can try to fix
> lupus at debian.org debian/rules
> lupus at ximian.com Monkeys do it better
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
More information about the Mono-devel-list