About single user setup for lightweights

[Martin Geisler]

Avery Pennarun <apenwarr at gmail.com> writes:

> git sucks at handling large binary files (>50 megs or so) unless you
> have boatloads of RAM. If your binary files are moderately sized (a
> few megs) then it'll probably be reasonably efficient. I don't know
> about hg and bzr for memory usage.

Mercurial also uses lots of RAM, way more than I had hoped. I did some
tests with this recently:

  http://markmail.org/message/uxqtmmnkyimxse5b

They show a factor 3-6 blowup when working with a 256 MB file.

We don't really recommend storing such large files in Mercurial. Instead
we recommend storing the files outside of the tree, e.g., on a server
with a huge disk. The bfiles extension can do this:

  http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/BfilesExtension

-- 
Martin Geisler

Fast and powerful revision control: http://mercurial.selenic.com/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20100319/0e6018c5/attachment.pgp