| 1 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
>> |
| 3 |
>> And currently the git history is still almost empty... |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> If you want pre-migration history you need to fetch that separately. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
How? Neither on gitweb.gentoo.org nor on github I found an obvious |
| 9 |
repository with this data. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> It is about 1.7G. |
| 12 |
> Considering that this represents a LOT more than 2-3 years of history |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
If the 1.7G are fully compressed history, this would confirm |
| 15 |
my estimate rather precisely, if it represents (1700/120 - 1) ~ 13 years. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Gentoo exists since 2002, so it seems my estimate was very good. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> (including periods where the commit rate was higher than it is today) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
One of my assumptions for the estimate was that this rate is |
| 22 |
constant in the average. Also I am not sure whether you right |
| 23 |
that this rate was really higher, previously: Nowadays, even a |
| 24 |
rather trivial eclass-update is separated into several commits, |
| 25 |
increasing the amount of data needed for storage. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> I think your estimates of where the migrated repo will be in 2-3 years |
| 28 |
> is too high. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Note that I compared squashfs with a git user who does not even |
| 31 |
care about git-internal recompression. Of course, you can decrease |
| 32 |
the factor somewhat if e.g. your checked-out tree is still stored |
| 33 |
on squashfs. This does not change the fact that the factor will |
| 34 |
increase every year by about 1 (or probably more, because git |
| 35 |
uses the uneffective gzip compression, only). |
Archives