3 ms·
I'm currently investigating using GitLFS for a large repo that has many binary and other large artifacts. I'm curious, did you experiment with LFS for prior to
by bluejekyll 9y ago
I'm currently investigating using GitLFS for a large repo that has many binary and other large artifacts.
I'm curious, did you experiment with LFS for prior to building GitVFS?
Also, I know that there is an (somewhat) active effort to port GitVFS to Linux, do you know if any of the Git vendors (GitLab and/or GitHub) are planning to support GitVFS in their enterprise products?
- saeednoursalehi 9y agoYes we did evaluate LFS. The thing about LFS is that while it does help reduce the clone size, it doesn't reduce the number of files in the repo at all. The biggest bottleneck when working with a repo of this size is that so many of your local git operations are linear on the number of files. One of the main values of GVFS is that it allows Git to only consider the files you're actually working with, not all 3M+ files in the repo.
- bluejekyll 9y ago> One of the main values of GVFS is that it allows Git to only consider the files you're actually working with, not all 3M+ files in the repo. That is an excellent point. Thanks!
- sytse 9y agoWe at GitLab are looking at GitVFS but have not made a decision yet https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/27895 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/27895