From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josef Wolf Subject: Re: Re-Transmission of blobs? Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:42:41 +0200 Message-ID: <20130912074241.GC14259@raven.wolf.lan> References: <20130910130837.GA14259@raven.wolf.lan> <20130911112758.GB14259@raven.wolf.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 12 09:50:19 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VK1fO-0008F0-Ok for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:50:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753717Ab3ILHuN (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2013 03:50:13 -0400 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:54517 "EHLO mail.inka.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751591Ab3ILHuM (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2013 03:50:12 -0400 Received: from raven.inka.de (uucp@[127.0.0.1]) by mail.inka.de with uucp (rmailwrap 0.5) id 1VK1fH-0005Xq-G4; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:50:11 +0200 Received: by raven.inka.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 55AF07638E; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 09:42:41 +0200 (CEST) Mail-Followup-To: Josef Wolf , git@vger.kernel.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mi, Sep 11, 2013 at 10:14:54 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Josef Wolf writes: > > On Di, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:51:02 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Consider this simple history with only a handful of commits (as > >> usual, time flows from left to right): > >> > >> E > >> / > >> A---B---C---D > >> > >> where D is at the tip of the sending side, E is at the tip of the > >> receiving side. The exchange goes roughly like this: > >> > >> (receiving side): what do you have? > >> > >> (sending side): my tip is at D. > >> > >> (receiving side): D? I've never heard of it --- please give it > >> to me. I have E. > > > > At this point, why would the receiving side not tell all the heads it knows > > about? > > It did. The receiving end had only one branch whose tip is E. It > may have a tracking branch that knows where the tip of the sending > end used to be when it forked (which is C), so the above may say "I > have E and C". It actually would say "I have B and A and ..." for a > bounded number of commits, but that does not fundamentally change > the picture---the important point is it is bounded and there is a > horizon. Therefore, the sending sinde has all information it needs to do any optimizations you can think of... > >> There are some work being done to optimize this further using > >> various techniques, but they are not ready yet. > > And this still stands. Do you have a pointer or something? I'd like to check out whether I can contribute to this work. -- Josef Wolf jw@raven.inka.de