On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:15 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 29 2018, Stefan Beller wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:00 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason > > <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> A co-worker asked me today how space could be saved when you have > >> multiple checkouts of the same repository (at different revs) on the > >> same machine. I said since these won't block-level de-duplicate well[1] > >> one way to do this is with alternates. > > > > Another way is to use git-worktree, which would solve the gc issues > > mentioned below? > > > > I view alternates as a historic artefact as the deduping > > of objects client side can be done using worktrees, and on the > > serverside - I think - most of the git hosters use namespaces > > and put a fork network into the same repository and use pack islands. > > > > Can you elaborate on why worktrees would not solve the problem? > > (I initially was hesitant to use them as I liked going into .git and tempering > > with files such as the config directly. But now I cannot `cd .git` any more; > > it turns out the advantages outweigh this corner case that I was attached to) > > This was discussed recently on-list & I chimed in with details about > that here: > https://public-inbox.org/git/87po1waqyc.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ & > https://public-inbox.org/git/87muwzc2kv.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > In particular the "multiple devs" use-case described in the latter > E-Mail is what I have in mind. Worktrees are inherently unsuitable for > that. Yeah, the separate ref namespace is something I would like to have on the client side too. I did consider implementing it a couple times but it's really no small task. Naively, I could achieve that pretty quick if all refs are loose, but performance would tank once the number of refs goes over say a hundred. -- Duy
