From: Jon Smirl Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 02:30:07 GMT Subject: Re: Figured out how to get Mozilla into git Message-ID: <9e4733910606091930j70da8ca5g1ec91c98ed9a2445@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 6/9/06, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Jon Smirl wrote: > > > > > > Btw, does anybody know roughly how much data a initial "cvs co" takes on > > > the mozilla repo? Git will obviously get the whole history, and that will > > > inevitably be bigger than getting a single check-out, but it's not > > > necessarily orders of magnitude bigger. > > > > 339MB for initial checkout I ran the checkout through bzip and it is 36.4MB, 46.4MB with zip. So the ratio may be 15 to 1 for the cvs co vs git > And I think people run :pserver: with compression by default, so we're > likely talking about half that in actual download overhead, no? > > So a git clone would be about (wild handwaving, don't look at all the > assumptions) four times as expensive - assuming we only look at a poor DSL > line as the expense - as an initial CVS co, but you'd get the _whole_ > history. Which may or may not make up for it. For some people it will, for > others it won't. > > Of course, to make up for some of the initial costs, I suspect that some > people who are used to "cvs update" taking 15 minutes to update two files, > it would be a serious relief to see the git kind of "300 objects in five > seconds" kinds of pulls. > > Although I guess that's one of the CVS things that SVN improved on. At > least I'd hope so ;/ > > Linus > -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com