Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by nickjj | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

nickjj·

I stopped using git to track my blog (about 175 posts) because a blog tends to have a lot more than just text files.

There's over 300 jpgs just in blog post related images.

Then I also have a photo gallery where there's about 500x 1920x1080 jpgs.

The .git/ folder ended up taking up gigs upon gigs of space.

View on HN

You could .gitignore your images folder (or store it outside of the repo) and still get the benefits of tracking text changes.

> 500x 1920x1080 jpgs. > > The .git/ folder ended up taking up gigs upon gigs of space.

Sounds very big for 500 small (IE not 10/20 mega pixel) jpegs?

Even at a generous 500k that should be just ~250 mb of that, unless you have on average four or more "versions" of each image? But I'm assuming the 1080p jpegs are "prints" and so doesn't change much?

There's only 1 version of each file and they never change. Outside of git it's not much space but I remember looking at the .git/ folder a couple of years ago and it was around 4GB.

At that point I blew out the directory and have gone gitless on my blog.

On what filsystem? (in case hard links are being mis-counted as copies). Also note that git for a time was pretty broken re:binary files, but that has sine been fixed/improved.

I was running xubuntu 14 back then, ext4 with no links. I don't remember the exact version of git but it was the one that came with Ubuntu's default package list.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com