From b21e8522bd3eb195c12ae3f91bc2d2399a0b2e9f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: imlew Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 12:26:56 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment: Still experimental? --- ...ment_5_0143b798e75ad25c5917794a49a879fb._comment | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/tuning/comment_5_0143b798e75ad25c5917794a49a879fb._comment diff --git a/doc/tuning/comment_5_0143b798e75ad25c5917794a49a879fb._comment b/doc/tuning/comment_5_0143b798e75ad25c5917794a49a879fb._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..aee3de42db --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/tuning/comment_5_0143b798e75ad25c5917794a49a879fb._comment @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="imlew" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/23858c3eed3c3ea9e21522f4c999f1ed" + subject="Still experimental?" + date="2024-03-06T12:26:56Z" + content=""" +`annex.tune.objecthash1=true` and `annex.tune.branchhash1=true` seem like they could be helpful in reducing git annex's inode usage, but the disclaimer about this feature being experimental is a little worrying. + +Since this it is over 10 years old though, is it still considered experimental or has it graduated to being a stable feature? I.e. will using this meaningfully increase the chance of losing data? + + +Also, what is the (potential) benefit of using lowercase for the hashes? +"""]] -- 2.30.2