From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sitaram Chamarty Subject: Re: optimising a push by fetching objects from nearby repos Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 10:51:09 +0530 Message-ID: <536F08C5.3010705@gmail.com> References: <536E2C19.3000202@gmail.com> <536ECC93.1070102@gmail.com> <1399772049733.13154@student.bi.no> <536EDC1C.5040101@gmail.com> <1399777917522.41294@student.bi.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" , milki To: "Storm-Olsen, Marius" , Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun May 11 07:21:29 2014 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 1WjMCW-00018B-WB for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 11 May 2014 07:21:29 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751405AbaEKFVQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 May 2014 01:21:16 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f180.google.com ([209.85.192.180]:38964 "EHLO mail-pd0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751232AbaEKFVP (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 May 2014 01:21:15 -0400 Received: by mail-pd0-f180.google.com with SMTP id y10so5289267pdj.25 for ; Sat, 10 May 2014 22:21:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ReQXPUR5bT0bwDrWd6pAQkfMIeJCkzeTQFFm2+8Mwlw=; b=JG3fl4oiB2lp4Jtiz1vb1e0DtQcT85dPUcjhqhuyHglq/Z5A2P4d98vC5dPOc5NIx9 OhjXMiW9bVifG30Q5VnWTXDM1PxoKHIAxbuMuiCULzh8Fw2+WUyyMkZ3pOyVIJoyw4zN CRel9XGlViO08fKHCaMzEm97KaYvD5EGfesOr864Gaa0REMA9aa/uocWnSCJb7/57IM8 LfqvRRJYAr+xrsmJ86nacAlr4y7OrNcdJYcd5oBXuD1LPc9nq4tTWQe9HDFNu3u9ltQB NDJYr6Od2jyT6vuOBUNbN/y5PxC++MiZ0ASsofEQXeOmzIaKMFzmrIiBUljYO2ZZMs8d l3GA== X-Received: by 10.66.158.10 with SMTP id wq10mr40595311pab.32.1399785674963; Sat, 10 May 2014 22:21:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sita-lt.atc.tcs.com ([117.216.215.9]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id kt8sm30929385pab.7.2014.05.10.22.21.11 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 10 May 2014 22:21:13 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 In-Reply-To: <1399777917522.41294@student.bi.no> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 05/11/2014 08:41 AM, Storm-Olsen, Marius wrote: > On 5/10/2014 9:10 PM, Sitaram Chamarty wrote: > 1. Clone remote repo > 2. Hack hack hack > 3. Fork repo on server > 4. Push changes to your own remote repo > is equally efficient. Your suggestions are good for a manual setup where the target repo doesn't already exist. But what I was looking for was validation from git.git folks of the idea of replicating what "git clone -l" does, for an *existing* repo. For example, I'm assuming that bringing in only the objects -- without any of the refs pointing to them, making them all dangling objects -- will still allow the optimisation to occur (i.e., git will still say "oh yeah I have these objects, even if they're dangling so I won't ask for them from the pusher" and not "oh these are dangling objects; so I don't recognise them from this perspective -- you'll have to send me those again"). [1]: for any gitolite-aware folks reading this: this involves mirroring, bringing a new mirror into play, normal repos, wild repos, and on and on...