From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: git-fetch per-repository speed issues Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 21:19:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <1151949764.4723.51.camel@neko.keithp.com> <1151973438.4723.70.camel@neko.keithp.com> <1151985747.4723.102.camel@neko.keithp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 04 06:20:27 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxcOc-00077C-Cx for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:20:22 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750838AbWGDET6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 00:19:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750861AbWGDET5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 00:19:57 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:60311 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750838AbWGDET4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2006 00:19:56 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k644JonW016613 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Jul 2006 21:19:51 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k644JnlP016318; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 21:19:50 -0700 To: Keith Packard In-Reply-To: <1151985747.4723.102.camel@neko.keithp.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.81__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.135 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Keith Packard wrote: > > Yeah, it says that only once. And, it runs the fetch-pack in about .5 > seconds. And, now the whole process completes in 4.7 seconds; perhaps > the remote server is less loaded than earlier this afternoon? Well, that's still strange. What takes 4.2 seconds then? > > And then it should leave a "fetch.trace" file in your working directory, > > which should show where that _one_ thing spends its time. > > It looks boring to me and spent 0.55 from start to finish. I can send > along the whole trace if you have an acute desire to peer at it. No, the 0.5 seconds is what I _expected_. There's something strange going on in your git fetch that it takes any longer than that. Can you instrument your "git-fetch.sh" script (just add random (echo $LINENO ; date) >&2 lines all over) to see what is so expensive? That fetch-pack really should be the most expensive part by far (and half a second sounds right), but it clearly isn't. At 4.7s, your fetch is still taking about ten times longer than it _should_. Linus