Hi Dmitry,
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Dmitry Oksenchuk wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Dmitry Oksenchuk
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, because of such amount of refs, push in "historical" repository
>>> takes 12 sec, push in "working" repository takes 0.4 sec, push in
Hi Christian,
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Dmitry Oksenchuk
> wrote:
>> 2014-10-30 19:54 GMT+03:00 Christian Couder :
>>>
>>> This might be a good idea. Did you already test that the small
>>> repository is really faster than the full repository?
>>
>> Yes, because of such amount of refs,
Hi Dmitry,
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Dmitry Oksenchuk wrote:
> 2014-10-30 19:54 GMT+03:00 Christian Couder :
>>
>> This might be a good idea. Did you already test that the small
>> repository is really faster than the full repository?
>
> Yes, because of such amount of refs, push in "histo
2014-10-30 18:44 GMT+03:00 W. Trevor King :
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 06:39:56PM +0300, Dmitry Oksenchuk wrote:
>> We're in the middle of conversion of a large CVS repository (20
>> years, 70K commits, 1K branches, 10K tags) to Git and considering
>> two separate Git repositories: "historical" with
Hi Christian,
Thanks for your reply.
2014-10-30 19:54 GMT+03:00 Christian Couder :
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Dmitry Oksenchuk
> wrote:
>> We're in the middle of conversion of a large CVS repository (20 years,
>> 70K commits, 1K branches, 10K tags) to Git and considering two
>> separate
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Dmitry Oksenchuk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We're in the middle of conversion of a large CVS repository (20 years,
> 70K commits, 1K branches, 10K tags) to Git and considering two
> separate Git repositories: "historical" with CVS history and "working"
> created with
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 06:39:56PM +0300, Dmitry Oksenchuk wrote:
> We're in the middle of conversion of a large CVS repository (20
> years, 70K commits, 1K branches, 10K tags) to Git and considering
> two separate Git repositories: "historical" with CVS history and
> "working" created without hist
Hello,
We're in the middle of conversion of a large CVS repository (20 years,
70K commits, 1K branches, 10K tags) to Git and considering two
separate Git repositories: "historical" with CVS history and "working"
created without history from heads of active branches (10 active
branches). This allow
8 matches
Mail list logo