How much space can your BitBucket account have?

Question

I created a BitBucket account today, and I love the fact that they allow you to have unlimited public/private repositories. However, I didn't find the size limit of your account? Does anyone know where to find it? Github offered 300mb if I remember correctly.

Solution 1

EDIT #2 (Over three years later, as pointed out by matchew)

As of 30 May 2014 There is now a 1gb (soft 2gb hard) limit. read this for more information

Here is a link to their FAQ which address this question

---

According to the banner on their homepage: Unlimited disk space. I can highly recommend it. ;-)

* EDIT (ALMOST TWO YEARS LATER) * I can still highly recommend it ;-) And in the meantime they have addressed this question in their FAQ

We don't place any limits on the size of your repositories, file uploads, or the number of public repositories you can have. Not on the paid plan or on the free plan. We do expect that you are polite and respect fair use. read more....

Solution 2

Bitbucket's documentation says:

We don't place any limits on the size of your repositories, file uploads, or the number of public repositories you can have. Not on the paid plan or on the free plan. We do expect that you are polite and respect fair use. If you push your entire MP3 collection that is not polite or respectful to the artists.

^{(Just for the sake of completeness)}

Solution 3

Note that Atlassian changed their policy on May 20th, 2014 for newly-created repositories:

Soft limit of 1 GB – In-product and email notifications will give you a heads-up that you’re approaching the limit.

Hard limit of 2 GB – Pushing to the repository will be disabled until you’re back under the limit.

From their Repository size limits blog post.

Solution 4

According to their FAQ:

We do not enforce any size limits. Unlimited is unlimited. However, we do ask people to use Bitbucket for software related stuff (Bitbucket is not intended to be used as a personal backup service for your home directory or MP3s).

Personally, I would prefer to pay for storage space and be able to story "beyond just source" honestly. I want to use them for not only source code but to include corporate scanned PDFs. They aren't huge but certainly it can be bigger than source code. I have no desire for MP3s audio files but being able to exchange files with my accountant and track progress in issues that are beyond code in something like JIRA is extremely useful.

Bitbucket is a great service though. Check them out.

Solution 5

August 2019: the soft limit (1GB) and hard limit (2GB) are still in place per repository.

But that will soon be for Git repositories only.

Regarding Mercurial specifically (which is one of the tags for this question), the limit will be 0.

BitBucket sunset SVN in 2011, explaining how to migrate to Mercurial.

BitBucket is sunsetting Mercurial today (2019), and they will remove those repositories in June 2020.
Not keep them read-only, not archive them: delete them.

From here:

We considered a conversion tool but ultimately [...] we are not planning to add a conversion tool

View more solutions

Comments

[Sean Bannister]

:) I know this is what they claim but there's no such thing as 'unlimited disk space'. I just wish they'd put an actual number on it so we know how big it really is because there has to be a point that it doesn't make financial sense for them. If you don't believe me try pushing a backup of your 3tb hard drive to their server and see if they contact you ;)

[Philip]

Maybe it takes an infinite amount of the... Like... they lower the transfer rate... By the way, I have the same problem. Actually they not publishing the limit makes me not upload more than 50 MB :D (I guess everybody thinks so...)

[Philip]

"not polite or respectful to the artists." Ok but respectful and polite to bitbucket ;)

[gagarine]

git is not good for binaries. You can eventually use SVG instead of pdf.

[whitehat101]

An ex-coworker noobishly added several large files to a git repo. The repo is currently 385.9 MB, and bitbucket is as happy as a clam. (devs hate it b/c cloning takes minutes! it isn't an active project, so meh)

[arxpoetica]

This is also an important point: "Keep in mind Bitbucket is a code hosting service not a file sharing service. If a lot of your files are extremely large or if your files are binaries or executables, you should understand Git or Mercurial will not work well with them. You'll find that even locally your repository is barely usable."

[Bruce Aldridge]

I have several large repos (lots of images in there and other cruft that should have never been added) on bitbucket including one thats 2.6GB and bitbucket has never stumbled for me

[Roberto Tyley]

ProTip: The BFG makes removing unwanted large files from repos really easy: rtyley.github.com/bfg-repo-cleaner

[Bobby Jack]

"git is not good for binaries" - what does that actually mean? What's the alternative - gitignore the PDF directories and selectively rsync them? Sounds like a lot more hassle than just including the PDFs in the repository. And "Use SVG instead of PDF" is just not a sensible suggestion.

[mrudult]

now they have given a limit of 1 Gb on repo size here

[santiagoIT]

@mrudult If you read carefully there are still no limits "We don't set any limits on the size of your repositories, file uploads, or the number of public repositories you can have.". They do expect fair usage.

[dodgy_coder]

BitBucket is an awesome service, just a small comment on limits ... uploading (git push) to bitbucket seems to be capped at 35 KB/sec for me. Maybe this is one of the ways BitBucket enforces fair use. Eg. if I wanted to upload 1GB of repo, it would take me at least 9 hours.

[flodin]

Your edit #2 doesn't actually adress the question, because it is a limit on repository size, not on account size. Each account is permitted to have multiple repositories. The question is what limit is imposed on the total size of all those repositories.

[tukan]

Never again BB (it was great service) will avoid Atlassian products.