On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
>
> Does that mean that the 64 K changes imported from bk would take ~ 3 GB?
> Is that real?
That's a _guess_.
> Have to tried to import it?
It would take days.
> I'm going to import the CVS data (with cvsps) - as the CVS "misses" half
> the changes, the resulting archive should be half in size too?
No. The CVS archive is going to be almost the same size. BKCVS gets about
98% of all the data. It just doesn't show the complex merge graphs, but
those are "small" in comparison.
> I don't know how much space did bk use, but 3 GB for the full history
> is reasonable for most people, isn't it? Especially that one can purge
> older data.
I think it's entirely reasonable, yes. But I may be off by an order of
magnitude. I based the 3GB on estimating form the sparse tree, but I
wasn't being too careful. Andrew estimated 2GB per year (at our current
historical rate of changes) based on my merge with him. So it's in that
general range of 3-6GB, I htink.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
