On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:32, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 23, 2012 5:59 AM, "Ben Smith-Mannschott" <bsmith.occs_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:22, Ashod Nakashian <ashodnakashian_at_yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>...
>
>> > Now, does this justify the cost of a new file-format? That's reasonable
>> > to argue. My take is that the proposed file-format is simple enough and the
>> > gains (especially on large projects with many branches/tags checked) should
>> > justify this overhead.
>>
>> It seems to me that these are the same issues that drove the design of
>> git's repository format, where individual items are first stored
>> individually gzipped (loose) and then periodically combined into
>> efficient pack files to save additional space and file system
>> overhead.
>>
>> Why invent a new format, when one exists that could serve?
>
> Please read Ash's document. He already considered and covered the git pack
> file format.
thanks. my bad.
Received on 2012-03-23 12:26:21 CET