Slashdot Mirror


Linux Kernel Archives Struggles With Git

NewsFiend writes "In May, Slashdot discussed Kerneltrap's interesting feature about the Linux Kernel Archives, which had recently upgraded to multiple 4-way dual-core Opterons with 24 gigabytes of RAM and 10 terabytes of disk space. KernelTrap has now followed up with kernel.org to learn how the new hardware has been working. Evidently the new servers have been performing flawlessly, but the addition of Linus Torvalds' new source control system, git, is causing some heartache by having increased the number of files being archived sevenfold."

3 of 45 comments (clear)

  1. This is normal. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    GIT is focused on trading more filespace for less bandwith. This is important for a lot of scattered developers who can afford 1-2 GB more on a harddrive, but 200-300 mb more would suck on a dsl or dialup connection.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  2. Re:File System Scalabilty? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except that you're ignoring speed, the need to be decentralised(i cannot stress this enough, it is very needed in an environment like the kernel is developed in) and low system requirements. Currently git needs only a few basic c libraries and bash.

    Actually i was spending hours to grasp his ideas about GIT, it clearly shows that he gave it a lof of though. Actually i think another SCM already started integrating GIT code into their SCM.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  3. Re:why blame git? by rossifer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (wouldn't it be cool to store data from your SQL tables in easy-to-parse flat files for instance? That would make recovery and manipulation a lot simpler)

    *snicker*

    *laugh*

    *great rolling peals of laughter*

    *sigh*

    *wipes tear from eye*

    You haven't done much work that actually required databases (or that would massively benefit from a relational programming model). The whole point of moving from flat files to a database is so that the data is stored already parsed, recovery is done by a tool provided by the db vendor, and manipulation is done within rules (constraints) that prevent "programming accidents" (bugs) or "pilot error" (users) from breaking relationships between parts of your data. That eliminates most of the need for recovery right there.

    CM systems get much more powerful and IMHO, simpler, when you start using a decent database as the backend. As for distributed work, there are plenty of good databases that inexpensively and easily fit onto any modern workstation (PostgreSQL is my personal favorite) that can act as a local backing store, giving you fully detached functionality and the benefits of a relationally organized system.

    Regards,
    Ross