On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > As a test for my "git-fat" extension, I liberated the large files from > PETSc's history (managing them outside the repository so that they need not > be fetched by everyone; though if you fetch them, the working tree behaves > identically to if they were in the repository). This brings the git version > of the PETSc repository down to 50MB, and the clone takes 12 seconds: > > $ time git clone git at bitbucket.org:jedbrown/petsc-git-lean > Cloning into 'petsc-git-lean'... > remote: Counting objects: 297100, done. > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (67974/67974), done. > remote: Total 297100 (delta 228357), reused 297100 (delta 228357) > Receiving objects: 100% (297100/297100), 41.22 MiB | 8.71 MiB/s, done. > Resolving deltas: 100% (228357/228357), done. > 12.105 real 13.472 user 2.000 sys 127.81 cpu > $ du -hs petsc-git-lean/.git > 50M petsc-git-lean/.git > > The original repository (not managing anything with git-fat) is 78MB with > git. Meanwhile, the hg clone takes 10x longer and is much larger: > > $ time hg clone ssh://hg at bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-dev petsc-dev-hg > requesting all changes > adding changesets > adding manifests > adding file changes > added 25751 changesets with 99594 changes to 10045 files > updating to branch default > 4296 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved > 124.376 real 40.954 user 1.827 sys 34.39 cpu > $ du -hs petsc-dev-hg/.hg > 178M petsc-dev-hg/.hg
Well ? did you try this with the equivalent mercurial feature: largefiles? Which version of mercurial is this? Also, what files did you deem were "fat" (horrible name, by the way)?