From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: Make "git clone" less of a deathly quiet experience Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 04:43:47 +0100 Message-ID: <43EEAEF3.7040202@op5.se> References: <7vwtg2o37c.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <1139685031.4183.31.camel@evo.keithp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linus Torvalds , Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List , Petr Baudis X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 12 04:43:56 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 1F889Q-0002es-46 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 04:43:52 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750875AbWBLDnt (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:43:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932172AbWBLDnt (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:43:49 -0500 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:13252 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750875AbWBLDns (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:43:48 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.20] (1-2-9-7a.gkp.gbg.bostream.se [82.182.116.44]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFA5B6BD01; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 04:43:47 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Keith Packard In-Reply-To: <1139685031.4183.31.camel@evo.keithp.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Keith Packard wrote: > On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 09:45 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > >>More importantly, it really wouldn't have helped that much in this >>situation. At least for me, the network is 90% of the problem, the >>pack-file generation is at most 10%. So cached packfiles really only >>matter for server-side problems (high CPU load, or lack of memory, or >>heavy disk activity). > > > I'd like to see git use less CPU than CVS does on my distribution host; > some mechanism for re-using either existing or cached packs would help a > whole lot with that. The alternative is to see people switch to rsync > instead, which seems like a far worse idea. > A weird oddity; Cloning is faster over rsync, day-to-day pulling is not. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231