RE: Git vs Monotone

-----Original Message-----
From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org 
[mailto:git-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jeff King
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:02 PM
To: sverre@rabbelier.nl
Cc: Git Mailinglist
Subject: Re: Git vs Monotone

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 08:13:59PM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:

quoted

If I clone the git mirror of our monotone repository, I find a 
checkout size of 148 MB after git-repack--running git-gc also 
increased the size by 2 MB, but I'll stick with the initial 

checkout 

quoted

size for fairness. If I multiply this by my 11 checkouts, I 

will have

quoted

1628 MB. This is even more compelling for me, as I now save 

728 MB of 

quoted

disk space with monotone."

Yikes. This is not even remotely a fair comparison to 
monotone, which is keeping a central db.

I think it is a fair comparison, but as you point out, the author is
doing the comparison wrong.  Monotone's "central db" (as you call it) is
really equivalent to git's object database.

quoted

I'm in the process of cloning the repo myself, and will 

check if doing 

quoted

a more aggressive (high --window and --depth values) repack 

will get 

quoted

us below that 148, but I'm thinking it's just that big a 

repo. Anyway,

It's much better than that. I just cloned

  git://github.com/felipec/pidgin-clone.git

and the _whole thing_ is 148M, including the working tree. 
His object db is only 88M. So he can do his 11 trees in 61 * 
11 + 88 = 759M, saving 141M over monotone.

Right, that's been my experience too, that git is smaller than monotone.
The author just needs to compare eqivalent concepts ;-)

-Peff
--

Cheers,
Craig