Does keeping (large-ish) binary files in a Git repository affect performance for operations besides cloning? -


i've read existing questions storing binary files in git repository, aspects still not clear.

the repository contains around 50 mb of code sources , around 1 gb of binary files. binary files seldom changed.

  1. is performance of usual daily workflow affected negatively binary files? operations commiting changed, moved, moved , changed files; merging; pulling , pushing. operations in question don't involve said binary files.
  2. from performance point of view (e.g. ram, cpu, hdd access) there merit removing these files select branches? opposed removing files repository , history.

if files never involved, doesn't make difference in terms of performance.
each commit marks modified files, when commit it's being applied files not tagged in don't not matter, whether 1kb or 1 gb. if file appears in commit matter, typically binary files slower deal with.
now, main problem cloning repository not action involves applying commits. instance when change different branch git has remove application of commits until common one, , apply commits of other branch until reaching desired checkout commit, or when merging or rebasing git has analyse commits find differences.
whenever commit containing modifications on binary file has read git, performance affected, , because of way git works, commits "used" quite often.
question, depends on mean "seldom changed". long branches typically work on don't have modifications on binary files shouldn't problem, if have modifications track when checking out different commits, performance gets affected.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

searchKeyword not working in AngularJS filter -

sequelize.js - Sequelize: sort by enum cases -

user interface - how to replace an ongoing process of image capture from another process call over the same ImageLabel in python's GUI TKinter -