repository disk usage

Matt Mackall mpm at
Thu Aug 11 17:07:13 CDT 2005

On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 09:42:47PM +0100, M.A. Williamson wrote:
> >>linux-2.6-git$ du -s -h
> >>335M    .
> >>linux-2.6-hg$ du -s -h
> >>449M    .
> >
> >Is that the full 2.6 history git (from bkcvs) or the mainline Linus git 
> >tree, which starts its history considerably more recently? IIRC, the hg 
> >repository stores the whole 2.6 history.
> Bzzzzt! I'm wrong :-) Since the introduction of packfiles in git, the hg 
> Linux repos is a mirror of the Linux 2.6 tree, so these repos are storing 
> the same amount of history.
> In agreement with your results, I get:
> linux-2.6.git: 337M
> linux-2.6.hg: 450M
> A couple more datapoints:
> old-2.6-bkcvs.git (the full 2.6 history): 412M
> linux-2.6.12.tar.bz2: 36M
> linux-2.6.12 (uncompressed): 236M
> This actually leads me to an interesting question: has anybody investigated 
> the effects of using bzip2 compression in either git or hg?

With Mercurial, about the same or slightly less compression, and much
more CPU time.

Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

More information about the Mercurial mailing list