On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 08:53:06PM -0500, David Mason wrote:
> Does it stay that size with moderate activity, or does it start growing
> significantly?

Incremental fastimport isn't that bad, but occassional repacks would
still help. Of course, github doesn't allow triggering those remotely
and the only option is to delete the repo and repush from scratch.
...which in turn breaks any forks. Basically, if you convert a larger
existing repo with fastimport, remember to repack aggressively before
pushing to github.

> Does the pack format slow it down, or speed it up?

Neither compared to fossil. I don't think either storage format is
optimized for reducing seeking (which matters for spinning disks) and
I'm not sure how well sqlite benefits from mmap. Everything else is
mostly a function of the delta chain length.

> Given that the Git version only has 93% of what the Fossil repo has, I'd
> say Fossil is doing quite well.

The sqlite tree is also both flat and shallow, which is one of the
biggest costs for the NetBSD repos.

Joerg
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users

Reply via email to