Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 10 Feb 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > I could do a revert on 'master' if it is really needed, but I found that > > the above reasoning is a bit troublesome. The thing is, if a tree to hold > > the notes would be huge to be unmanageable, then it would still be huge to > > be unmanageable if you split it into 256 pieces. > > The thing is, a tree object of 17 megabyte is unmanagably large if you > have to read it whenever you access even a single node. Having 256 trees > instead, each of which is about 68 kilobyte is much nicer. See my other email on this thread; we'd probably need to unpack all 256 subtrees *anyway* due to the distribution of SHA-1 names for commits. -- Shawn. -- 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
