On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Sean Farley > <sean.michael.farley at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Well ? did you try this with the equivalent mercurial feature: >> largefiles? > > > Nope, feel free. Most of the speedup is independent of the large files > (which only change the git repo size from 78MB to 50MB).
Righto. >> Which version of mercurial is this? > > 2.4.2 Nevermind, the patch I saw was on irc and I can't find it again (no logging enabled). Supposedly, the chunked data writer was reinitializing the connection at every-ish chunk. >> Also, what files did >> you deem were "fat" > > A smattering of powerpoint slides, pdfs, random binaries, and a few very > large log files. Note that this was a performance experiment and don't care > about which files. In practice, I'd suggest managing fewer (or even none). Huh? Do you mean not even worrying about separating binary files?