[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: archive storage format comments on the size

From: Miles Bader
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: archive storage format comments on the size
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:41:34 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 04:39:38PM +0200, Pau Aliagas wrote:
> > > Cached revisions don't work very well with extremely large source trees.
> I agree that they are a bit excessive, but I was proposing to build them 
> every 100 patches and deleting the previous ones. It could even be done in 
> a fine-tuned crontab, in Andrea's case, as his needs are very special.

Even every 100 patches they're probably excessive with some trees.  For
instance I was having problem with emacs, where a cached revision is about 20
megabytes in size (that's compressed); a typical changeset is only about 8KB,
so spacewise, and network transfer-wise, you'd need over 2000 changesets to
equal even a single cached revision.  Since most people actively working on
branch tend to stay at least somewhat close to the `head' of a branch,
hitting a cached revision is like suddenly encountering an elephant in your

Now consider that Linux is five times the size of emacs...

None the less, avoiding the overhead of applying lots of little changesets is
still often desirable, which is the reason for the other thread on summary

"Though they may have different meanings, the cries of 'Yeeeee-haw!' and
 'Allahu akbar!' are, in spirit, not actually all that different."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]