Re: Unresolved issues #2 (shallow clone again)
- From
Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 7, 2006, 23:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <46a038f90605071627i6a335f61lf5e35291bfbe340c@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20060507120149.40e9f749.vsu@altlinux.ru>
On 5/7/06, Sergey Vlasov <vsu@altlinux.ru> wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> For linux v2.6.16: > > 7,3M commits-b41b04a36afebdba3b70b74f419fc7d97249bd7f.pack > 24M commits_trees-8397f1c2a885527acd07e2caa8c95df626451493.pack > 97M full-c7b2747a674ff55cb4a59dabebe419f191e360df.pack
With this pack arrangement, do you get any noticeable difference in walking commits? How about walking commits+trees with git-log <path> ?
I wonder whether segregating packs by object type would make things better...
cheers,
martin