From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin Langhoff" Subject: Re: Smart fetch via HTTP? Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 01:10:35 +1200 Message-ID: <46a038f90705170610mf9c9b0eu7b40af709469a601@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070515201006.GD3653@efreet.light.src> <46a038f90705152225y529c9db3x8615822e876c25a8@mail.gmail.com> <46a038f90705161426n3b928086t2d3e68749557f866@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 17 15:10:48 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Hofkh-0002ep-7e for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 17 May 2007 15:10:43 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755399AbXEQNKh (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2007 09:10:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755412AbXEQNKh (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2007 09:10:37 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.234]:60661 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755399AbXEQNKg (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2007 09:10:36 -0400 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h31so533865wxd for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 06:10:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ulv5e3jfP54FlU7B0wiaPtyS9G/V3TNoYHmnm/v5IKH4WWz7TPq11vjmidG7b6ECUP/reswYC7GyWFIqdGwWG0Qd5Hlm/wDyI9CfzVs5/iQ1LSt0fi6pDqnyZPrZfgsyup9n4F0udbRHqDezDn3NLIY6RekBHAtg7PgAu5H/UHI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=tT6GfW1/S9P5zDZap8z6aPNI9qqGl/D/O5RnQP9ergyqysTW8U7hrOg9a88f20ZrM1RHnrS+VSLvt7FMC35co4UALoPyhtKvr2n8O0EGEtqaMcfvDQtzi1ZFSqnaRwu2PeigWXShT6eeqi1uhLq2xESrXyMPm/QbFGyoCVxaMkA= Received: by 10.90.52.18 with SMTP id z18mr416170agz.1179407435774; Thu, 17 May 2007 06:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.75.15 with HTTP; Thu, 17 May 2007 06:10:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 5/17/07, Matthieu Moy wrote: > FYI, bzr uses HTTP range requests, and the introduction of this > feature lead to significant performance improvement for them (bzr is > more dumb-protocol oriented than git is, so that's really important > there). They have this "index file+data file" system too, so you > download the full index file, and then send an HTTP range request to > get only the relevant parts of the data file. That's the kind of thing I was imagining. Between the index and an additional "index-supplement-for-dumb-protocols" maintained by update-server-info, http ranges can be bent to our evil purposes. Of course it won't be as network-efficient as the git proto, or even as the git-over-cgi proto, but it'll surely be server-cpu-and-memory efficient. And people will benefit from it without having to do any additional setup. It might be hard to come up with a usable approach to http ranges. But I do think it's worth considering carefully. cheers, m