|
|
|
|
|
|
by konstruktor
4131 days ago
|
|
|
I believe you are conflating two aspects: Large binaries, which are, in very specific circumstances, a (or maybe the only) valid reason to use Perforce, and large codebases, which usually aren't. When looking at an actual example of the latter [1], you will see that they are heavily optimizing against contention on the central database by limiting the size of database operations. If you want to do something that would require a longer database query: Enjoy your client side error message about implementation details you never wanted to know about. [1] http://research.google.com/pubs/pub39983.html |
|
|
Unfortunately I did not mean to. I would agree with you that binaries are the 95% use case for P4. I think most developers typically wouldn't want to check many or any binaries in (maybe the odd icon or other small, slowly-changing asset, in which case git is adequate), but game developers and people with other binary stuff (e.g. circuit designs) will have large, changing binaries.
However really big (GB-scale) repos can be painful in git. This is why google gritted their teeth and used P4 until they outgrew it too. That's what I meant by "really really big" -- something of the scale that most of us will (hopefully) never see.