Re: About single user setup for lightweights
- From
Martin Geisler <mg@lazybytes.net>
- Date
- Mar 19, 2010, 09:53 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87k4t81vt8.fsf@hbox.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <32541b131003181913v7319d6a1ydd72c0177729dbf4@mail.gmail.com>
Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> writes:
> git sucks at handling large binary files (>50 megs or so) unless you > have boatloads of RAM. If your binary files are moderately sized (a > few megs) then it'll probably be reasonably efficient. I don't know > about hg and bzr for memory usage.
Mercurial also uses lots of RAM, way more than I had hoped. I did some tests with this recently:
http://markmail.org/message/uxqtmmnkyimxse5b
They show a factor 3-6 blowup when working with a 256 MB file.
We don't really recommend storing such large files in Mercurial. Instead we recommend storing the files outside of the tree, e.g., on a server with a huge disk. The bfiles extension can do this:
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/BfilesExtension
-- Martin Geisler Fast and powerful revision control: http://mercurial.selenic.com/