Re: [PATCH 3/3] revision: insert unsorted, then sort in prepare_revision_walk()
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Apr 2, 2012, 20:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20120402205112.GA28824@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20120402203728.GB26503@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 04:37:28PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Has anyone looked seriously at a new index format that stores the > redundant information in a more easily accessible way? It would increase > our disk usage, but for something like linux-2.6, only by 10MB per > 32-bit word. On most of my systems I would gladly spare some extra RAM > for the disk cache if it meant I could avoid inflating a bunch of > objects.
Actually, that is an over-statement of the size. That would be a per-object piece of metadata. A per-commit piece like timestamp would be only 1M per 32-bit word in linux-2.6 (about 1/4 million commits). Or put another way, we could store timestamps and 20-byte parent sha1s in about 11M.
-Peff