Monotone analysis

[Felipe Contreras]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Luke Schierer <lschiere at pidgin.im> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:23:09PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Luke Schierer <lschiere at pidgin.im> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:33:01AM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 3:20 AM, Luke Schierer <lschiere at pidgin.im> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:04:03PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> >> >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Luke Schierer <lschiere at pidgin.im> wrote:
>> >> >> > On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 01:45:19PM -0700, Ka-Hing Cheung wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 23:17 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> >> >> >> > = Git recommendation =
>> >> >> > did some digging around, and since I am quite nearly an invenerate
>> >> >> > pack-rat, I found a working copy of a git repo I created back when we
>> >> >> > were evaluating which dvcs to use.  The git repo from then is 649M, my
>> >> >> > much much newer monotone database is only 244M.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> I asked you before; did you run git-gc?
>> >> >
>> >> > I am sorry, I did not see that question.  I did not.
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> > Either way, I am impressed with the results of git-gc, now that it is
>> >> > available.  It takes my nearly 700mb repository and reduces it to 44mb.
>> >> > Very impressive.
>> >>
>> >> No, the repository back then was much smaller, I think the result
>> >> would be around 15MB, probably less.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Felipe Contreras
>> >
>> > Um, no, Those numbers *ARE* from a repository from back then.
>>
>> Without packing.
>
> and 44Mb with git-gc.

Ah, sorry, I was confused, now I see what you meant; it's the actual
repository from that time.

I think I did a version git clone of your i.p.p that took 15MB... it's
weird that the first mtn clone I did was 28MB when the whole i.p.p.
was in it, afaik your repo from back then should have less commits
than that.

-- 
Felipe Contreras