From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: git-fetch per-repository speed issues Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:05:27 +0200 Message-ID: <44AA5987.5060206@op5.se> References: <1151949764.4723.51.camel@neko.keithp.com> <1151973438.4723.70.camel@neko.keithp.com> <7vsllinj1m.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <1151987441.4723.110.camel@neko.keithp.com> <44AA4CB0.7020604@op5.se> <20060704111838.GA4285@spinlock.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 04 14:06:04 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fxjem-0001tk-JY for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:05:32 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932235AbWGDMF3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 08:05:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932237AbWGDMF3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 08:05:29 -0400 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:42656 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932235AbWGDMF2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 08:05:28 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.20] (unknown [213.88.215.14]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D5C6BCC6; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 14:05:27 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.1.fc4 (X11/20060501) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Matthias Kestenholz In-Reply-To: <20060704111838.GA4285@spinlock.ch> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Matthias Kestenholz wrote: > * Andreas Ericsson (ae@op5.se) wrote: > >>Keith Packard wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 20:40 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> "And, it's painfully slow, even when the repository is up to date" >>>> >>>>and gave a 17-second time. >>> >>> >>>It's faster this evening, down to 8 seconds using ssh and 4 seconds >>>using git. I clearly need to force use of the git protocol. Anyone else >>>like the attached patch? >> >>Since it changes the current meaning of ssh+git, I'm not exactly >>thrilled. However, "git/ssh" or "ssh/git" would work fine for me. The >>slash-separator could be used to say "fetch over this, push over that", >>so we can end up with any valid protocol to use for fetches and another >>one to push over. >> > > > If we would do such a thing, we would be probably better off > allowing different URLs for pushing and pulling, because the git and > ssh URLs will only be the same, if the git repositories are located > in the root folder and I suspect that's almost never the case. > True. We use relative paths where I work, so for us either way would work. Your way is better though. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231