To ensure that we don't regress either the size or runtime performance
of multi-pack reuse, add a performance test to measure both of these.
The test partitions the objects in GIT_TEST_PERF_LARGE_REPO into 1, 10,
and 100 packs, and then tries to perform a "clone" at each stage with
both single- and multi-pack reuse enabled.
Note that the `repack_into_n_chunks()` function in this new test script
differs from the existing `repack_into_n()`. The former partitions the
repository into N equal-sized chunks, while the latter produces N packs
of five commits each (plus their objects), and then another pack with
the remainder.
On git.git, I can produce the following results on my machine:
Test this tree
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5332.3: clone for 1-pack scenario (single-pack reuse) 1.57(2.99+0.15)
5332.4: clone size for 1-pack scenario (single-pack reuse) 231.8M
5332.5: clone for 1-pack scenario (multi-pack reuse) 1.79(2.96+0.21)
5332.6: clone size for 1-pack scenario (multi-pack reuse) 231.7M
5332.9: clone for 10-pack scenario (single-pack reuse) 3.89(16.75+0.35)
5332.10: clone size for 10-pack scenario (single-pack reuse) 209.9M
5332.11: clone for 10-pack scenario (multi-pack reuse) 1.56(2.99+0.17)
5332.12: clone size for 10-pack scenario (multi-pack reuse) 224.4M
5332.15: clone for 100-pack scenario (single-pack reuse) 8.24(54.31+0.59)
5332.16: clone size for 100-pack scenario (single-pack reuse) 278.3M
5332.17: clone for 100-pack scenario (multi-pack reuse) 2.13(2.44+0.33)
5332.18: clone size for 100-pack scenario (multi-pack reuse) 357.9M
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Git - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
Git is a fast, scalable, distributed revision control system with an unusually rich command set that provides both high-level operations and full access to internals.
Git is an Open Source project covered by the GNU General Public License version 2 (some parts of it are under different licenses, compatible with the GPLv2). It was originally written by Linus Torvalds with help of a group of hackers around the net.
Please read the file INSTALL for installation instructions.
Many Git online resources are accessible from https://git-scm.com/ including full documentation and Git related tools.
See Documentation/gittutorial.txt to get started, then see
Documentation/giteveryday.txt for a useful minimum set of commands, and
Documentation/git-<commandname>.txt for documentation of each command.
If git has been correctly installed, then the tutorial can also be
read with man gittutorial or git help tutorial, and the
documentation of each command with man git-<commandname> or git help <commandname>.
CVS users may also want to read Documentation/gitcvs-migration.txt
(man gitcvs-migration or git help cvs-migration if git is
installed).
The user discussion and development of Git take place on the Git mailing list -- everyone is welcome to post bug reports, feature requests, comments and patches to git@vger.kernel.org (read Documentation/SubmittingPatches for instructions on patch submission and Documentation/CodingGuidelines).
Those wishing to help with error message, usage and informational message
string translations (localization l10) should see po/README.md
(a po file is a Portable Object file that holds the translations).
To subscribe to the list, send an email with just "subscribe git" in the body to majordomo@vger.kernel.org (not the Git list). The mailing list archives are available at https://lore.kernel.org/git/, http://marc.info/?l=git and other archival sites.
Issues which are security relevant should be disclosed privately to the Git Security mailing list git-security@googlegroups.com.
The maintainer frequently sends the "What's cooking" reports that list the current status of various development topics to the mailing list. The discussion following them give a good reference for project status, development direction and remaining tasks.
The name "git" was given by Linus Torvalds when he wrote the very first version. He described the tool as "the stupid content tracker" and the name as (depending on your mood):
- random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not actually used by any common UNIX command. The fact that it is a mispronunciation of "get" may or may not be relevant.
- stupid. contemptible and despicable. simple. Take your pick from the dictionary of slang.
- "global information tracker": you're in a good mood, and it actually works for you. Angels sing, and a light suddenly fills the room.
- "goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks