Please run gc on repositories

[Fabian Wohlfart]

Dear Altassin / Bitbucket Team,

I kindly request you to run gc on the following repos.
Locally I used git reflog expire --expire=now --all && git gc --prune=now --aggressive for gc and git count-objects -vH for size calculation.

Current: 48mb
After reflog & gc: 6mb

Current: 111mb
After reflog & gc: 7mb

Current: 216mb
After reflog & gc: 9mb

Current: 146mb
After reflog & gc: 8mb

Current: 662mb
After reflog & gc: 6mb

I have more repos to clean soon.
Should I always publish the full link?
Connected to this issue: https://community.atlassian.com/forums/Bitbucket-questions/How-to-run-Garbage-Collection-on-server-side-repostories/qaq-p/2996319#M116905

Thanks in advance!

[Tansu Akdeniz]

Hi @Fabian Wohlfart 

Welcome to the community.

The Atlassian support team has been notified and they will reach out to you.

[Ben]

Hi @Fabian Wohlfart 

Some of those repositories have had their size reduced - others have not. This is because there were large binary files present in those repositories at the time that pull requests were created/merged:

• As a result of improvements made to diff speed for PR's - binary files are stored as part of those PR's as a result
• This explains why the size locally is different vs remote, as PR's are purely a remote concept and are stored server-side
• To resolve this and shrink the repository - you would need to duplicate the repository and delete the original (as the new repo wouldn't have any PR's present):
  How to duplicate a Bitbucket Cloud repository 
• Alternatively, a Standard plan does not have a workspace size limit - and you may have unlimited repositories at 4GB each:
  https://www.atlassian.com/software/bitbucket/pricing 

The reduction is as follows:

• 44mb > 32MB
• 111.9MB > 102.2MB
• 216MB > 8.9MB
• 146.3MB  > 146.3MB
• 666.0MB > 653.9MB

I'd highly advise against sharing the full URL for those repositories, as this is a public forum. You can simply share the size reported in Repository Settings > Repository Details and we'll know which repo's you're referring to - I've redacted these from your original question.

Cheers!

- Ben (Bitbucket Cloud Support)

[Fabian Wohlfart]

Hi Ben, 

thanks for the answers.

• I was asked to post the URL here before, that's why I did so. Not needing to do this is great.
• I do not understand why the improvements for PR's effect the size of my repository. The biggest one with 600mb does not have any PR's and any other branches other than master. Please explain why this effect this repository. Other big repositories could been reduced from 200mb > 8m which is a huge success. Isn't there a way to clean this without duplicating the repo? It would be a huge time commitment if I need to set up my pipelines on my servers again for every repository.
• Yes I am willing to get a Standard plan, but there is one problem.
  I wanted to make a separate post about this, but I will elaborate it here now also:

The problem is that the Standard plan is not made for freelancers, but for agencies.
As a freelancer I occasionally work with other developers on repositories.
All of these other developers cost me 1 seat.
I already moved to Github for some projects, because I cannot open more seats.
That's sad because I like Bitbucket.
These people are only working in one project, not in another.
It's not my general team, but a single collaboration for a single repository.
And this particular way of work organisation is very common for freelancers, that's nothing only I am struggeling with – I talked to many other freelancers and all have the same problem.

Yet I would need to pay for 1 permanent seat for this person. 
So simply having a Standard plan makes up 5 seats which starts at 16,5€ a month.
I am not arguing about the amount of the money, but about the concept why I spend it. It's unfair that I have to pay for so many seats even though these developers are only available in one repository, which at it's maximum is only worked on every now-and-then. Meanwhile in Github I can pay for one user and collaborate on any other repository, they understood that it's about working together and won't punish this with more fees. If any a paid organisation has to pay for seats, not me as a freelancer.

Let me know if I misunderstood the pricing model of Bitbucket.