Re: Git performance results on a large repository
- From
Matt Graham <mdg149@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 3, 2012, 23:05 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALts4TT49VAWPZ6XO9qahDTu=2E425QcRvXx5-75Jv8n4yp8RA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CB5179E9.3B751%joshua.redstone@fb.com>
Hi Josh,
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 17:00, Joshua Redstone <joshua.redstone@fb.com> wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> Thanks for the comments. I've included a bunch more info on the test repo > below. It is based on a growth model of two of our current repositories > (I.e., it's not a perforce import). We already have some of the easily > separable projects in separate repositories, like HPHP. If we could > split our largest repos into multiple ones, that would help the scaling > issue. However, the code in those repos is rather interdependent and we > believe it'd hurt more than help to split it up, at least for the > medium-term future. We derive a fair amount of benefit from the code > sharing and keeping things together in a single repo, so it's not clear > when it'd make sense to get more aggressive splitting things up. > > Some more information on the test repository: The working directory is > 9.5 GB, the median file size is 2 KB. The average depth of a directory > (counting the number of '/'s) is 3.6 levels and the average depth of a > file is 4.6. More detailed histograms of the repository composition is > below:
Do you have a histogram of the types of files in the repo? And as suggested earlier, is svn working for you now because it allows sparse checkout? I imagine the stats for svn on the full repo would be comparable or worse to what you measured with git?