From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-fetch: avoid local fetching from alternate (again)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 23:45:35 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vd4umebxc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vsl3iefoj.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Tue, 06 Nov 2007 22:24:28 -0800")
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
>
>> Back in e3c6f240fd9c5bdeb33f2d47adc859f37935e2df Junio taught
>> git-fetch to avoid copying objects when we are fetching from
>> a repository that is already registered as an alternate object
>> database. In such a case there is no reason to copy any objects
>> as we can already obtain them through the alternate.
>
> Well spotted. It would be a good idea to commit the big comment
> from contrib/examples/git-fetch.sh to fetch_local_nocopy()
> function, which would have made us realize that the patch does
> not refrain from applying this optimization even when shallow
> is in effect. But I think that is actually a good change.
Having thought about this further by writing that comment myself
(patch attached), I suspect that the test at the beginning of
the function to see if we are talking to another local
repository is not necessary. Even if we are _not_ fetching from
the remote, we could have all the necessary objects connected,
albeit the chance of that is rather slim. But that means the
rev-list test will error out rather quickly because objects near
the tips are more likely to be missing, and if we are talking
about a true remote connection, networking cost will most likely
outweigh the cost to do this checking.
---
transport.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/transport.c b/transport.c
index 0604dc6..a887491 100644
--- a/transport.c
+++ b/transport.c
@@ -614,6 +614,20 @@ static struct ref *get_refs_via_connect(const struct transport *transport)
return refs;
}
+/*
+ * We would want to bypass the object transfer altogether if
+ * everything we are going to fetch already exists and connected
+ * locally.
+ *
+ * The refs we are going to fetch are in to_fetch (nr_heads in
+ * total). If running
+ *
+ * $ git-rev-list --objects to_fetch[0] to_fetch[1] ... --not --all
+ *
+ * does not error out, that means everything reachable from the
+ * refs we are going to fetch exists and is connected to some of
+ * our existing refs.
+ */
static int fetch_local_nocopy(struct transport *transport,
int nr_heads, struct ref **to_fetch)
{
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-07 7:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-07 2:41 [PATCH] git-fetch: avoid local fetching from alternate (again) Shawn O. Pearce
2007-11-07 6:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-07 7:45 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2007-11-07 20:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-08 7:35 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-11-08 8:04 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-11-07 8:12 ` Johannes Sixt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7vd4umebxc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=spearce@spearce.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).