From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Spam: Re: git branch performance problem? Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:58:31 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <8c5c35580710101344t3aed4214h4f999072483c4cb5@mail.gmail.com> <20071010213925.GB2963@fieldses.org> <8c5c35580710101445h232f9a67jd0c326b3b97ae3dd@mail.gmail.com> <470D585D.1030808@nrlssc.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Brandon Casey , Lars Hjemli , "J. Bruce Fields" , hanwen@xs4all.nl, git@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Ralphson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Oct 11 12:59:19 2007 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 1Ifvl5-0000rX-SW for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:59:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753966AbXJKK6y (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:58:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753887AbXJKK6y (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:58:54 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:44364 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751456AbXJKK6x (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:58:53 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2007 10:58:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 11 Oct 2007 12:58:51 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18T4elEBhcTnUKL2xyHWTeRLFTIBkghXDkIHLWQVO k2TgufbRRj0271 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Mike Ralphson wrote: > It's not something I've really looked into, but there seems to be a > reflogs mechanism which can temporarily pin an otherwise unreferenced > object so it doesn't get deleted. Would it be possible to populate the > remote's view of referenced objects into this, at the point of clone, > push or pull, which would seem to be the points at which this might be > changing. > > Obviously this is of no use if you're 'anonymously' poncing off a > third repo to save clone time, but if you're in control of both repo's > it might be useful. I cannot really allege that I understood what you were trying to say, but I guess you want to use clone to get rid of objects you just threw out by either filter-branch or deleting a branch. The answer is that the file:// as well as the git:// protocol will do that. For local clones, they are not the default, since they are slower than hardlinking. Hth, Dscho