From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: use of version 3 delta is now optional.
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:57:44 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610151150530.3952@g5.osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vac3xzbze.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> I think that is sensible. I also was thinking that we should
> call the current one packv3 and the one with delta-base-offset
> packv4.
Quite frankly, I wonder if the pure "copy size extension" (aka "v3") thing
is really worth it at all.
I mean, seriously, how much does it buy us? A couple of bytes per every
64kB of delta copied? And the downside is that you can't re-use the deltas
with old clients and/or you have to re-create a "v2" delta at run-time
from a v3 delta by inflating, fixing and deflating it.
So I would suggest:
- call the delta-base-offset thing the "v3" pack format.
- forget about the current "v3 delta" entirely. We might as well continue
to support reading it, but there's no point in actually ever generating
it.
In other words, I think the current situation in top-of-master is the
right situation. There's simply no point in adding code to convert v3 to
v2 on the fly - even if it's not rocket science, it's just not _worth_ it.
(You could also have the extended copy deltas in v3-only, and only send it
to clients that you know supports it. However, the "convert to v2" format
issue still rears its ugly head, and as a result I just don't think it's
_ever_ worth it).
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-15 18:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-15 6:29 Recent and near future backward incompatibilities Junio C Hamano
2006-10-15 7:44 ` [PATCH] pack-objects: use of version 3 delta is now optional Junio C Hamano
2006-10-15 9:09 ` Jakub Narebski
2006-10-15 15:53 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-15 18:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-10-15 18:18 ` Jakub Narebski
2006-10-15 18:51 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-16 4:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-10-16 13:27 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-15 18:30 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-15 20:00 ` A Large Angry SCM
2006-10-16 2:52 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-15 18:57 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2006-10-16 13:43 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-17 16:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-10-17 16:51 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-15 19:29 ` A Large Angry SCM
2006-10-15 14:52 ` Recent and near future backward incompatibilities Horst H. von Brand
2006-10-15 15:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-10-15 18:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-10-15 22:40 ` Theodore Tso
2006-10-15 23:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-10-16 2:13 ` Stephen Hemminger
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0610151150530.3952@g5.osdl.org \
--to=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
--cc=nico@cam.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).