From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fetch-pack: Finish negotation if remote replies "ACK %s ready" Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:16:01 -0400 Message-ID: <20110317071600.GG11931@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1300146519-26508-1-git-send-email-spearce@spearce.org> <20110317071512.GF11931@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Shawn O. Pearce" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 17 08:16:09 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q07RI-0002aB-Lq for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:16:09 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751846Ab1CQHQE (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:16:04 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:48440 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751694Ab1CQHQD (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:16:03 -0400 Received: (qmail 21126 invoked by uid 107); 17 Mar 2011 07:16:37 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:16:37 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 17 Mar 2011 03:16:01 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110317071512.GF11931@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 03:15:12AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > Assuming the client is only following the remote (and does not make > > its own local commits), the client needs 11 rounds to spin through > > the entire list of tags (32 commits per round, ceil(339/32) == 11). > > Unfortunately the server knows on the first "have %s" line that > > it can produce a good pack, and does not need to see the remaining > > 320 tags in the other 10 rounds. > > Does this optimization help in that case? From looking at the code, it > seems that we offer "ACK %s ready" only in the case that the client > has something we do not. I.e., they _are_ building local commits on top. OK, never mind, I just read your 2/2. ;) Sorry for the noise. -Peff