Storage requirements of tree transforms

[Denys Duchier]

Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> writes:

> | I don't think that was very reasonable: content may be extremely large.
>
> I didn't mean that the iterators AND the new file contents would be held
> in memory. Just the iterators, which would hopefully be
> non-memory-hogging objects, like file objects, and not like StringIOs.

but that's even less workable because of the limitation on the number of open
filedescriptors per process (like 1024, which is far from sufficient for the
linux tree).

Cheers,

--Denys