From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Cc: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>, Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] protocol v2
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 19:47:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqioekawmb.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79ka8Zg86qqvWByNiP3F6a9QggO-bNY3ZZ9g+A-MdKYQ7NQ@mail.gmail.com> (Stefan Beller's message of "Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:46:47 -0800")
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
> A race condition may be a serious objection then? Once people believe the
> refs can scale fairly well they will use it, which means blasting the ref
> advertisement will become very worse over time.
I think we are already in agreement about that case:
A misdetected case between (new client, new server) pair might go
like this:
- new client connects and sends that no-op.
- new server accepts the connection, but that no-op probe has
not arrived yet.. It misdetects the other side as a v1
client and it starts blasting the ref advertisement.
- new client notices that the ref advertisement has the
capability bit and the server is capable of v2 protocol. it
waits until the server sends "sorry, I misdetected" message.
- new server eventually notices the "no-op probe" while blasting
the ref advertisement and it can stop in the middle.
hopefully this can happen after only sending a few kilobytes
among megabytes of ref advertisement data ;-). The server
sends "sorry, I misdetected" message to synchronise.
- both sides happily speak v2 from here on.
However, I do not think it needs to become worse over time, because
we can change and adjust as the user population and their use
patterns evolve. For example, you can introduce a small delay
before the new versions of server starts the v1 advertisement, and
make that delay longer and longer over time, as the population of
v1-only clients go down, for example.
Difficulty (see J6t's comment) in other implementations may be a
more important roadblocks. It seems, however, that our current
thinking is that it is OK to do the "allow new v1 clients to notice
the availabilty of v2 servers, so that they can talk v2 the next
time" thing, so my preference is to throw this "client first and let
server notice" into "maybe doable but not our first choice" bin, at
least for now.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-02 3:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-24 3:12 [RFC/PATCH 0/3] protocol v2 Stefan Beller
2015-02-24 3:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] Document protocol capabilities extension Stefan Beller
2015-02-24 3:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] receive-pack: add advertisement of different protocol options Stefan Beller
2015-02-24 3:12 ` [PATCH 3/3] receive-pack: enable protocol v2 Stefan Beller
2015-02-24 4:02 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/3] " Duy Nguyen
2015-02-24 5:40 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-24 6:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-24 23:37 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-25 12:44 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-02-25 18:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-26 7:31 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-26 10:15 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-02-26 20:08 ` Stefan Beller
[not found] ` <CACsJy8DOS_999ZgW7TqsH-dkrUFpjZf0TFQeFUt9s0bNhHY0Bw@mail.gmail.com>
2015-02-27 22:20 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-26 20:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-27 1:26 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-27 2:15 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-27 23:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-27 23:44 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 0:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-28 0:46 ` Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 1:01 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/5] protocol v2 for upload-pack Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 1:01 ` [RFC/PATCH 1/5] upload-pack: only accept capabilities on the first "want" line Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 1:01 ` [RFC/PATCH 2/5] upload-pack: support out of band client capability requests Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 7:47 ` Kyle J. McKay
2015-02-28 11:22 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-02-28 22:36 ` Kyle J. McKay
2015-03-01 0:11 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-02-28 11:36 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-02-28 1:01 ` [RFC/PATCH 3/5] connect.c: connect to a remote service with some flags Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 11:11 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2015-03-01 3:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-28 1:01 ` [RFC/PATCH 4/5] daemon.c: accept extra service arguments Stefan Beller
2015-03-01 3:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-02-28 1:01 ` [RFC/PATCH 5/5] WIP/Document the http protocol change Stefan Beller
2015-02-28 12:26 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-01 9:11 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/5] protocol v2 for upload-pack Johannes Sixt
2015-03-02 2:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-02 3:47 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-03-02 9:21 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/3] protocol v2 Duy Nguyen
2015-03-02 9:24 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-03 10:33 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-03 17:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-03 19:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-04 1:54 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-04 4:27 ` Shawn Pearce
2015-03-04 12:05 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-04 19:10 ` Shawn Pearce
2015-03-05 1:03 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-05 16:03 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-24 17:42 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-24 18:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-06 23:38 ` [PATCH] protocol upload-pack-v2 Stefan Beller
2015-03-06 23:40 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-06 23:55 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-07 0:00 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-07 0:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-07 4:28 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-07 5:21 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-08 20:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 19:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-04-02 12:37 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-04-02 14:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-04-02 22:18 ` Martin Fick
2015-04-02 22:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-04-02 23:00 ` Stefan Beller
2015-04-02 23:14 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-10 1:38 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-10 19:36 ` Kyle J. McKay
2015-02-28 0:07 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/3] protocol v2 Duy Nguyen
2015-02-28 0:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-01 8:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-01 11:32 ` Duy Nguyen
2015-03-01 19:56 ` Stefan Beller
2015-03-02 1:05 ` David Lang
2015-03-01 23:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-02 1:09 ` David Lang
2015-03-02 3:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-01 23:06 ` Philip Oakley
2015-03-02 9:32 ` Duy Nguyen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqioekawmb.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.