Re: Managing multiple branches in git

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Managing multiple branches in git
Date: 2009-06-02 23:01:53
Message-ID: E3E20585-CFEB-4B05-8104-F3D677EC12B7@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Jun 2, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> Umm, no. there are *no* ,v files in my working copies (I just
> checked, to make sure I wasn't on crack). The repository has them,
> but the working copy does not. SVN does keep the equivalent - that's
> how you can work offline for doing things like 'svn diff'. But it
> makes the repo quite ugly, in fact. Running recursive grep on a
> subversion working copy is quite nasty.

`git grep` to avoid this issue with Git.

> Well, it looks like the extra storage for my current 6 (soon to be
> 7) working copies of postgres over the CVS equivalents would cost
> something over 100Mb each. I know disk space is cheap but that's
> kinda sad. The volume of info kept in CVS metadata files is
> insignificant. Saying they are the same is just not so.
>
> Is it possible for multiple working sets to share the same GIT_DIR?

FWIW, I've found that my Bricolage repository in Git was far smaller
than it was in Subversion. You can also `git gc` to get the size down.
I would be surprised if all of the checkouts together were over 100MB,
especially if you're sharing files between them.

Best,

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2009-06-02 23:04:04 Re: Managing multiple branches in git
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-06-02 22:56:33 Re: Managing multiple branches in git