[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       git
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-gc.txt: change --aggressive
From:       Teemu Likonen <tlikonen () iki ! fi>
Date:       2008-05-13 11:08:42
Message-ID: 20080513110842.GB3088 () mithlond ! arda ! local
[Download RAW message or body]

Teemu Likonen wrote (2008-05-13 13:57 +0300):

> Pieter de Bie wrote (2008-05-13 11:53 +0200):
> 
> > I keep seeing people regularly packing their repo with git gc
> > --aggressive. However, in my experience, this seldom results in
> > a smaller repository. This can be because the repository was
> > repacked tightly previously (for example, with a high --window
> > value) or because incremental "git gc" just makes better packs
> > anyway. Throwing away that information is often not a good idea.
> >
> > The documentation for the --aggressive flag was misleading, in that
> > it hints that you'll get a smaller pack, which is often not the
> > case.
> 
> This patch might be a good thing. But from ordinary user's point of
> view this raises questions: if gc --aggressive really is not that
> aggressive then the option itself is misleading. Why not change gc
> --aggressive to be really effective? Using high --window/--depth value
> etc.

I mean, what I'm seeing many places is suggestions to run

  git repack -a -d -f --window=100 --depth=100

to get the repo small. _If_ there's such a common need for this then
wouldn't it be good thing if there was easy and self-descriptive command
for it, such as gc --aggressive?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]