Cursor's blog on scaling Git makes me think that Anthropic just likes reinventing the wheel with their infinite token capacity: https://cursor.com/blog/git-at-any-scale
replyCursor scaled git to way more writes/s than Anthropic did with their rewrite.
The Cursor folks are doing cool work, but this is comparing apples to oranges; it works fundamentally differently and does not have a clear one-to-one mapping. Scion is solving many problems other than raw write speed (which is currently not even remotely close to the bottleneck and is trivially horizontally scalable in Scion).
replyCursor shows “pushes per minute” while Anthropic shows “merges per day.” You can’t directly compare those and say Cursor’s system is more performant. Claude agents could be pushing a similar throughput of changesets into Scion, while some merge agent regularly takes batches and merges them into the trunk.
replyYou would need 864 pushes per merge for the Anthropic version to be operating at a higher scale.
replyAnyway, Anthropic seems able to do exactly one thing well: train a frontier model. Their other software seems like garbage. OpenAI seems to be following a similar trend lately too.