Sylvain Beucler wrote: > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:30:13PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Sylvain Beucler wrote: >> > Do you know about concurrency? I.e. need we make the repo read-only >> > for developers when we're doing such a repack? >> >> >From what I recall, that's not necessary. >> I think (probably a gross simplification) it creates a big pack of >> whatever's on hand, and then flips a ref (atomic rename) to make the new >> pack's objects live, and then removes the packed (and now logically >> unlinked) objects at its leisure. Any new objects that came in while >> packing are simply not packed. > > I guess I'll try on a copy of the Gnash repo. > > It seems there's some kind of special condition in that project > though, I don't get nearly the same ratio on my projects (admittedly > not nearly as active either :)).
Those numbers are typical of a large project that's been converted from e.g., cvs, and whose repository has never been properly compressed.
