From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Drew Northup Subject: Re: git fuse Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2013 18:01:12 -0500 Message-ID: References: <201312192215.01103.thomas@koch.ro> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Git Mailing List To: Thomas Koch X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 26 00:08:13 2013 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 1VvxYi-0003gz-2N for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Dec 2013 00:08:12 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752391Ab3LYXHs (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Dec 2013 18:07:48 -0500 Received: from mail-ie0-f173.google.com ([209.85.223.173]:35517 "EHLO mail-ie0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752330Ab3LYXHr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Dec 2013 18:07:47 -0500 Received: by mail-ie0-f173.google.com with SMTP id to1so8179886ieb.18 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2013 15:07:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=3wGTsPa5UMEW+UQ45XSEtW9S5Ee2MtXBvMBSewllN1w=; b=0HIueFP53DmFFwv5SSks4fdYZbsd8+wX70RzaELol35OQPv4ZyGK5hNnLsBI7RWD6G J7yr5A6Q+Zc4DS9pBsjSgvBwBVfC2gIJKuChriGKoCr38YZwpaaOthgvKQejmaVSmWi8 5d48my6gjVlb1U+Wd3uD1STm87HLMY19bIBOQJWJ48SHqTwVC5c7rC7eEGa/GVHHgQxc GJj0q59miD1sRtPDd1xafw01iUVkFYEH4YCcdJlmMGD2ikg/JzueEHNgXWj1sqQRFssT XpGwSU0o+mPrCK0jwPGd3LRT2YXlgcR2JJ1AB2ufq/tiZe4wdyFot7yuUnm1G2Zu2t2F N7fA== X-Received: by 10.50.43.134 with SMTP id w6mr31705235igl.20.1388012472848; Wed, 25 Dec 2013 15:01:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.43.138.9 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Dec 2013 15:01:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201312192215.01103.thomas@koch.ro> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Thomas Koch wrote: > Hi, > > I'm thinking about using Git for web application deployment and thought that I > wouldn't even need to checkout a worktree if I could access the bare git repo > via fuse. Thomas, Given that gitweb (and more than a few other similar tools) doesn't use FUSE and works on bare repositories I question why you think you'd need (or want) to introduce the additional layer. > What would be the performance impact? Once the files are in the filesystem cache > it shouldn't matter anymore, how fast the git fuse layer is, should it? If your concern is caching, it should be implemented upon already rendered / prepared objects whenever possible--frequently not a file system level implementation. This is a design concern that has no specific requirement whatsoever to do with FUSE (or for that matter, with most of the VFS layer when accessing raw disk--as VFS itself is highly optimized already). I am not qualified to answer questions about FUSE use of the VFS cache. I would strongly consider using a tool such as Varnish if you are concerned about performance when serving static or semi-static content (may it reside in a Git repo or elsewhere). The architectural concerns of your web-app should probably guide your design in this sort of direction anyway if it will be expected to sustain notable throughput over time. I hope that helps. (If you want to discuss this further it would be worth considering if your questions are Git questions or web-app design questions. The latter should be taken elsewhere.) -- -Drew Northup -------------------------------------------------------------- "As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?" -John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59