Compressing weaved revisions?

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi all,

For trees with, e.g. 500 revisions, the revision storage may actually be
larger than tree storage.

The new format doesn't weave revisions, because they're almost
completely different for each revision.  They also don't compress well.
 For my example tree, the revisions are 47 k uncompressed and 32 k
compressed.

But if they're tarred and gzipped, the tarfile is 7.2k, and if they're
tarred and bzipped, that's 5.7k.

I expect if revisions were weaved and gzipped, we'd see roughly the same
level of compression, i.e. 6x

They would have the disadvantages of weaves, but we've already accepted
those disadvantages for texts and inventories.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDPUX50F+nu1YWqI0RAninAJ9ya/IJMIEK/gXG18z5OIe3Mcb/+ACeOM5B
NfNzK4Wiv2z2JxRnPbV8P1E=
=eLF+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----