Strategies for push/merge problem?

[Douglas Philips]

On or about 2008 Jul 22, at 8:43 PM, Giorgos Keramidas indited:

> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:18:55 -0400, Doug Philips <dgou at mac.com> wrote:
>> My question is, how well does Mercurial cope with lots of branch
>> names?
... non-branch-name text elided...
>> Medium-esque changes (5+ changesets) often last many days or weeks
>> before being remerged. But lets say I have 1,000 of them over the
>> course of several years of development, will that cause performance
>> issues with 'hg log' or any of the other commands? I can't seem to
>> figure out when in the wiki or book or man pages to go for that
>> answer...
>
> It probably makes a LOT sense to merge more often than `once every  
> 1000
> changesets'.

Sorry, I was too terse.
My understanding is that "branch names live forever".
So after a few years, you might have many hundreds or low-thousands of  
medium-long branch names for branches that were merge after, say 5-30+  
changesets. Most of those will be inactive branches, but since the  
names never die, they're still in the repo, right?

My question is what is the performance impact of that, and what about  
the interface. hg branches prints 3 pages of text, etc. :)

Thanks,
	--Doug