From: Caleb Epstein (caleb.epstein_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-01 09:35:55
On 9/1/05, Jeff Garland <jeff_at_[hidden]> wrote:
Finally, I'm not sure we addressed all the concerns with subversion. As I
> recall there was discussion about large increases in the diskspace
> etc. Personally I think it's the way to go, but I'd think we need to get
> broader agreement first.
Just a data point in the disk-space argument. I've done some conversions of
decent-sized CVS repositories and the Subversion repository did not use that
much more disk space than CVS did. It ended up being about 1:1 SVN:CVS ratio
in terms of disk space usage, maybe slightly higher but not a lot.
I manage to create a massively large Subversion repository (~10:1 size
increase) when converting a CVS repository that had been pruned of old tags
(cvs tag -d). The branches-without-tags confused cvs2svn and caused it to
generate very many "unnamed" branches that chewed up a ton of disk space.
Excluding those branches where the old tags had been removed fixed this
I think the GCC folks and other groups who have very large CVS repositories
(multi-gigabyte) have had similar results.
-- Caleb Epstein caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk