Reminds me of this article: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/bharry/2017/05/24/the-largest-git-repo-on-the-planet/
"As a refresher, the Windows code base is approximately 3.5M files and, when checked in to a Git repo, results in a repo of about 300GB... Before the move to Git, in Source Depot, it was spread across 40+ depots and we had a tool to manage operations that spanned them."` On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > On 2018-01-06, Lari Rasku <lari.ra...@elisanet.fi> wrote: > > On 01/02/18 14:03, Stuart Henderson wrote: > >> Hosting a large git repository is not trivial, it uses far more server > >> resources (memory and cpu time) than an anoncvs/cvsync/rsync mirror, and > >> OpenBSD src/ (or even just ports/) is *huge* for a git repo. It works > >> better on Linux where things are more separated. Even *just the kernel* > >> is split across multiple repos. > > > > The Linux kernel repo is multiple times the size of OpenBSD-src [1], > > so I don't see how things being more separated helps them re: hosting. > > Perhaps kernel.org just has more hardware to throw at the problem? > > > > And in case anyone else was confused, the Linux kernel itself isn't split > > across multiple repos: you can build a fully functional one from a single > > checkout. It is the kernel *development* that is split across multiple > > repos, with occasional merges to mainline. > > > > [1]: Naive estimate based on comparing object counts when cloning from > > GitHub: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/ > - 5,779,337 objects, > > Ah thanks, I didn't manage to track that down with the 850 others :) > > > https://github.com/openbsd/src - 1,741,047 objects. > > When I've tried converting in the past I've had things like it taking > about a minute to do a git log, even after the git repack that people > familiar with git suggested I try. > > >> Anyway, has anyone fetched your openbsd-src0-test repo from github while > >> crossing crypto export boundaries? That has the exact same issue, > >> except that now as it's your repo, it may well be considered that it's > >> *you* that is responsible for exporting it. > > > > Surely the responsibility for exporting lies with the one doing the > > checkout? Otherwise I don't see how operators of OpenBSD CVS mirrors > > in the US aren't in the same position. > > > > Or is there some technical distinction between "mirroring" and "checking > out" > > a repository? (I ask because the warning against fetching sources from > USA > > when located outside North America only appears on > > https://www.openbsd.org/cvsync.html, not https://www.openbsd.org/ > anoncvs.html > > or https://www.openbsd.org/ftp.html.) > > I don't know all the details. But the github page about it at > https://help.github.com/articles/github-and-export-controls/ > makes it sound like it's the repo owner's responsibility to me. > > >
