Hacker News Reader

Comment by whoomp12342 | Hacker News Reader

5 gigs? what is this, repo hosting for ants?

That does seem ridiculously small. It's probably fine for 95% of projects though.

That will depend on how well they handle forks. I could easily see myself exceeding such a limit just issuing bug fixes.

Especially since one of the bugs I'm likely to fix is, "why is this library so damned big?"

Shrinking the library won't make the repo any smaller. You have to erase history to do that.

Yeah I thought that might be confusing.

Artifact size depends on what garbage from the project infrastructure gets included into the artifact. So simple things like not having a fully populated ignore file will cause things to get included into the project or the artifact.

People who don't care about file size don't care about file size. If the artifact is ridiculous, sometimes the repo is ridiculous too. Therefore if you take a bunch of projects with outsized artifacts, you are going to have above average repository sizes as well.

GitLab team member here. Forks of projects get deduplicated, so only the changes you make will contribute to your storage consumption as long as the fork relationship is maintained.

Update: our team recently identified an issue impacting how we calculate storage which results in forks being counted towards Usage Quota. This will be addressed before we begin enforcement.

I need solutions that fit 100% of my projects. I don’t want to use service X for 95% and service Y for 5%.

You are also willing to pay for it?

Because it sounds like you want to use 100% of the service and not pay for it.

Then you can pay for more data, seems fair no?

Git change compression is quite effective. Unless you start checking in large binaries, most companies will never get close to 5 GB. (Even 1 GB is a pretty substantial amount of code.)

Do personal accounts really have 5gigs of code??? Unless you have a lot of models/artifacts, images, plain text code should be well under 5gb for 100s of projects

Where this will really hit is the docker image registry. The lazy CI implementations will just tag a new image every single commit and leave them sitting there forever. Hundreds of megs each, completely useless.

In a way I'm almost glad people will have to start cleaning up after themselves.

Most repo's are in the singles or tens of MB. If those are ants, then sure.

I dont disagree with that, especially given the assertion that artifact storage from pipelines does not count towards the 54gb, it just feels like a tiny amount for 2022. just bumping it to like 20gb would make me feel better even though it doesnt really matter.

That is what github has now, doesn't seem to be out of the ordinary.

That per repo, GitLab's is for the whole account.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com