From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Sebrecht Subject: Re: Performance issue: initial git clone causes massive repack Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 02:05:36 +0200 Message-ID: <20090405000536.GA12927@vidovic> References: <20090404220743.GA869@curie-int> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Git Mailing List To: "Robin H. Johnson" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Apr 05 02:07:43 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LqFtk-0006db-LA for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2009 02:07:41 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754911AbZDEAFp (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Apr 2009 20:05:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754454AbZDEAFp (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Apr 2009 20:05:45 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f165.google.com ([209.85.219.165]:34477 "EHLO mail-ew0-f165.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754002AbZDEAFo (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Apr 2009 20:05:44 -0400 Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so1443375ewy.37 for ; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:05:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=YLgPYqk0nfakVeezvX4HRFPU9rDlxGuFeQweRiaTMwQ=; b=OGUyopedcUABrL316CJCN3Dzaw2tHBXPFLgIU+kkF0kKIMVErnDtIjwbIXL8WPJIsd lc9g8+R55MtU/cG0PZVM9ptxaZWs3BWYGFID69b2WJhLyWRDyD0VBmNq/mIhsWRCqe0N oB5MmxaTE8quHNkZj7DhOOTFaey+4C9O+N7VM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=tO3k2VYf43F8RJxK2gpBqENsgaKwEWS9t5FTFlSGdGIoSnu+lBNmxC6JIs0ve223Su Nd3GcK/7Jt7OZZYNkULWl455OT+TShQw62oTfHEHDWnWytpd3uKfAEjI3M5R+0l77gu8 bTJqJh4vTDvWjemKU/ULQN+FtaY4vNETZ1NK4= Received: by 10.210.40.10 with SMTP id n10mr2105093ebn.71.1238889941790; Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from @ (ABordeaux-258-1-82-86.w86-201.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.201.73.86]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm4827218eya.36.2009.04.04.17.05.39 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090404220743.GA869@curie-int> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 03:07:43PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Our full repository conversion is large, even after tuning the > repacking, the packed repository is between 1.4 and 1.6GiB. As of Feburary > 4th, 2009, it contained 4886949 objects. It is not suitable for > splitting into submodules either unfortunately - we have a lot of > directory moves that would cause submodule bloat. Actually, I'm not sure that a full portage tree repository would be the best thing to do. It would not be suitable in the long term and working on the repository/history would be a big mess. Why provide a such repo ? Or at least, why provide a such readable repo ? IMHO, you should provide a repository per upstream package on the main server. PS: what about cc'ing gentoo-scm list ? -- Nicolas Sebrecht