From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J.C. Pizarro" Subject: Re: Question about your git habits Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:08:35 +0100 Message-ID: <998d0e4a0802230508w12f236baiaf2d9ab5f364670a@mail.gmail.com> References: <200802221837.37680.chase.venters@clientec.com> <20080223014445.GK27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <7vfxvk4f07.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080223020913.GL27894@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <998d0e4a0802221823h3ba53097gf64fcc2ea826302b@mail.gmail.com> <998d0e4a0802221847m431aa136xa217333b0517b962@mail.gmail.com> <20080223113952.GA4936@hashpling.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Charles Bailey" , LKML , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 23 14:09:17 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JSu7w-0006Ny-Lo for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:09:17 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756693AbYBWNIj (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 08:08:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755060AbYBWNIi (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 08:08:38 -0500 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.227]:30578 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756541AbYBWNIg (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Feb 2008 08:08:36 -0500 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h31so712795wxd.4 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 05:08:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=vFupO5zcJCOX1+SHx387bHEYUbpbdbsyxEmhv/LcSx0=; b=oTZHEnGh8En7LHdS7TuEeXAxp5M86zfgkyjHZ24ybTEPPdTkzcIcyMtH2eQ8ocE+v3BJ71Em6zI+7nvq0cOfleDVhpHBJiJJBwmq0Nms8LDwfyZzZ0RDsA4USi2NxqtCm3cnKxG0JHeAbphzzzB1iwp0IrRRa8qa9Gbut2f8cmU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=uzy3m/+NzmbZ/mpKT2SIWVhAsvAQ6U/13J1eAdiUXshNMaUvor/3NRt2LuHE0yx1iS+OwMbRH+j1d7QzHNbfdamr7RXPzUWVjsQs2TpgAejkCXcND6G71t3TsvTUAFoevrcb13fDjf0PCT+HKsqUTCG7CzFHjHo+UyC7V1TxBCk= Received: by 10.70.80.6 with SMTP id d6mr273836wxb.15.1203772115418; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 05:08:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.40.12 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 05:08:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20080223113952.GA4936@hashpling.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 2008/2/23, Charles Bailey wrote: > On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 03:47:07AM +0100, J.C. Pizarro wrote: > > > > Yesterday, i had git cloned git://foo.com/bar.git ( 777 MiB ) > > Today, i've git cloned git://foo.com/bar.git ( 779 MiB ) > > > > Both repos are different binaries , and i used 777 MiB + 779 MiB = 1556 MiB > > of bandwidth in two days. It's much! > > > > Why don't we implement "binary delta between old git repo and recent git repo" > > with "SHA1 built git repo verifier"? > > > > Suppose the size cost of this binary delta is e.g. around 52 MiB instead of > > 2 MiB due to numerous mismatching of binary parts, then the bandwidth > > in two days will be 777 MiB + 52 MiB = 829 MiB instead of 1556 MiB. > > > > Unfortunately, this "binary delta of repos" is not implemented yet :| > > > It sounds like what concerns you is the bandwith to git://foo.bar. If > you are cloning the first repository to somewhere were the first > clone is accessible and bandwidth between the clones is not an issue, > then you should be able to use the --reference parameter to git clone > to just fetch the missing ~2 MiB from foo.bar. > > A "binary delta of repos" should just be an 'incremental' pack file > and the git protocol should support generating an appropriate one. I'm > not quite sure what "not implemented yet" feature you are looking for. But if the repos are aggressively repacked then the bit to bit differences are not ~2 MiB.