> But don't do the pruning until you're absolutely sure that you don't> require the old stuff anymore. Or, of course, you could just keep an independent copy of the wholerepo pre-filter-branch. On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@xxxxxx> wrote:>> On 2008.10.10 05:38:25 -0400, marcreddist@xxxxxxx wrote:> >> You'll probably also want to run "git gc" on your repo to actually> >> get rid of the huge object that was added (or does filter-branch do> >> this automatically?).> >> > I'm not sure it's required by git-filter-branch alone. In this case :> >> > git-gc saves almost 5% after the file deletion> >> > it saves 4.5% before the file deletion> >> > If I run git gc before and after the git filter-branch, it saves 4.5%> > and then 0.2%.>> Did you clear the refs/original namespace and your reflogs? Otherwise,> the huge object is most likely still referenced and thus won't get> pruned. Also, I usually prefer "git repack -adf" over "git gc" in such> situations, but that's probably just because I don't know the right> way to force "git gc" to immediately prune stuff just once.>> But don't do the pruning until you're absolutely sure that you don't> require the old stuff anymore.>> Björn> --> 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��.n��������+%����;��w��{.n��������n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�m
