From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthias Kestenholz Subject: Re: git-fetch per-repository speed issues Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:18:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20060704111838.GA4285@spinlock.ch> 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 04 13:18:57 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 1FxivW-0003DY-Dg for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 13:18:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751282AbWGDLSo (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 07:18:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751283AbWGDLSn (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 07:18:43 -0400 Received: from mail20.bluewin.ch ([195.186.19.65]:20655 "EHLO mail20.bluewin.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751282AbWGDLSn (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 07:18:43 -0400 Received: from spinlock.ch (81.62.208.146) by mail20.bluewin.ch (Bluewin 7.3.110.2) id 449255CA003E99E2; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 11:18:41 +0000 Received: (nullmailer pid 6514 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 04 Jul 2006 11:18:38 -0000 To: Andreas Ericsson Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44AA4CB0.7020604@op5.se> X-Editor: Vim http://www.vim.org/ X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux 2.6.17-ga39727f2 (i686) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 249B 3CE7 E6AE 4A1F F24A DC44 B546 3304 690B 13F9 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: * 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. Matthias