> -----Original Message----- > From: git-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:git-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff King > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:02 PM > To: sverre@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Git Mailinglist > Subject: Re: Git vs Monotone > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 08:13:59PM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > > > If I clone the git mirror of our monotone repository, I find a > > checkout size of 148 MB after git-repack--running git-gc also > > increased the size by 2 MB, but I'll stick with the initial > checkout > > size for fairness. If I multiply this by my 11 checkouts, I > will have > > 1628 MB. This is even more compelling for me, as I now save > 728 MB of > > disk space with monotone." > > Yikes. This is not even remotely a fair comparison to > monotone, which is keeping a central db. > I think it is a fair comparison, but as you point out, the author is doing the comparison wrong. Monotone's "central db" (as you call it) is really equivalent to git's object database. > > I'm in the process of cloning the repo myself, and will > check if doing > > a more aggressive (high --window and --depth values) repack > will get > > us below that 148, but I'm thinking it's just that big a > repo. Anyway, > > It's much better than that. I just cloned > > git://github.com/felipec/pidgin-clone.git > > and the _whole thing_ is 148M, including the working tree. > His object db is only 88M. So he can do his 11 trees in 61 * > 11 + 88 = 759M, saving 141M over monotone. > Right, that's been my experience too, that git is smaller than monotone. The author just needs to compare eqivalent concepts ;-) > -Peff > -- Cheers, Craig -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
