From: Tom Lord <lord@emf.net>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org
Subject: on when to checksum
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:25:07 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200504202225.PAA15992@emf.net> (raw)
Linus,
I think you have made a mistake by moving the sha1 checksum from the
zipped form to the inflated form. Here is why:
What you have set in motion with `git' is an ad-hoc p2p network for
sharing filesystem trees -- a global distributed filesystem. I
believe your starter here has a good chance of taking off to be much,
much larger than just a tool for the kernel.
A subset of your work: blobs and blob databaes, has much wider application
than just sharing trees: Those parts of `git' can form a very solid
foundation for many other applications as well. To the extent `git'
succeeds in the context of the kernel, it will be invested in and
extended and generalized --- and the kernel project will benefit.
So don't ignore those wider applications even though they are not your
focus today: they will generate investment that feeds back to your project.
Your `git' is silent on transports and mirroring of blob databases --
tasks for scripting, sure -- but those elements won't be far behind.
Eventually, slinging around blobs as atomic elements
of payloads will become very common.
The blob handle (aka "address")/payload model of a blob db is very
clean and simple. In a network of nodes speaking to one and other
by exchanging blobs, I forsee a prominent need for intermediate
nodes that process blobs "blindly" and as quickly as possible.
Blob compression is mostly goofy if regarded just as a way to
save on (diminishingly cheap) disk space but it is mostly
sane if regarded as a way to cut the cost of network bandwidth
roughly in half.
Must intermediate nodes inflate the payloads passing through them
or which they cache just to validate them? That's not a desirable otucome
for many obvious reasonhs.
There *are* concerns about checksumming zips: it is necessary to nail
down the zip process and make sure it is absolutely and permanently
deterministic for this application. But *that* is the problem to
solve, not avoid by moving what the checksum refers to.
Thanks,
-t
next reply other threads:[~2005-04-20 22:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-20 22:25 Tom Lord [this message]
2005-04-20 22:41 ` on when to checksum Linus Torvalds
2005-04-20 22:52 ` Tom Lord
2005-04-20 23:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-20 23:39 ` Tom Lord
2005-05-02 19:21 ` Tom Lord
2005-05-02 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-04-21 16:53 ` Andrew Timberlake-Newell
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=200504202225.PAA15992@emf.net \
--to=lord@emf.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).