How expensive is branch operation?

[bchan]

We are using Vault to manage our codebase.
Folder Property for the folder in Vault reports that there are 116 Subfolders, Treesize is 386.34 MB

How expensive is doing a branch on this top level codebase folder?
For example, lets say I only need to really make changes to about 5% of the files in my codebase. At the start of the project, I might not know exactly which files. I have the option of just branching the entire thing, or branching just the parts of it as I go along. The second option makes things more complicated for me because at the time of branching I'll need to do some Pinning etc. Also, it offers an opportuntity for people to make mistakes So just branching the whole thing in one shot at the beginning of the project seems like the better choice.

But I gotta wonder what kind of a penalty I'm taking in terms of growing my database size or other things.

Thanks.
Bill

[Beth]

In terms of raw database size, a branch shouldn't be a problem. It doesn't create a second copy of all the code. It's more like a fork. The history up to the branch stays where it is, and the branch just picks up from the point of branching forward.

Where you will some effect is in the tree manager size. A very large branch increases the number of nodes you see in the tree. Every file and folder constitutes a node. Updating the client-side cache can sometimes take a little longer with very large trees. This can be mitigated some by following the recommendations in the Vault performance KB article posted here: http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic.php?t=4206.

You might find a few articles on managing branches to help you as well in your decision:

• Eric Sink's Source Control How To: http://www.ericsink.com/scm/source_control.html
  Best Practices for Managing Branches: http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic.php?t=193
  Basics of using Label, Cloak, Share, Pin, Branch and Merging: http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic.php?t=9