From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4FD71F406; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:55:34 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:55:34 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: Konstantin Ryabitsev Cc: meta@public-inbox.org Subject: Re: Has anyone tried importing lkml? Message-ID: <20180115175534.GA5787@80x24.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > The question I do have is whether public-inbox is the right tool for > doing something like this. LKML message count is somewhere in the > millions, and I'm curious what that would look like when imported into a > git tree used by public-inbox. For comparison, the Linux kernel itself > is only about 700,000 commits, so a git repo of all LKML archives would > easily dwarf that. It's probably too slow for object walking (which impacts clone-ability) at the moment due to tree object churn. The current 2/38 tree structure (which mirrors git loose objects) turned out to be a not-so-great idea; maybe 2/2/36 would be I would love to help improve public-inbox for LKML needs while preserving compatibility. > Has anyone tried doing this at all, or should we blaze that trail on our > own? I prefer we improve public-inbox together so it can benefit other projects, too. I know there's been interest in having Debian archives using it, too.