From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2173C205C9 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 20:42:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755272AbdAKUmg (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:42:36 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:60923 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932755AbdAKUlf (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:41:35 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E6BE5EAE9; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:41:34 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=g2C3frTldeck AbvlzQ2C547Ospw=; b=vRY0/kcLr/FakFssnmDnMXGlbNDQw1bkChXUx4KfCJNP kMmmq4gnOwa7jTdmnQQzvoY1MuNiFRHyHVIkem91PIe2wSy1pdiGNvkX/fpMNoXZ IZ7WNUHFri+gDviY17DNMpaV2otz82sWLtFKQK7HIqU39XYUULlvCMNYGfMR03g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=oLq97b CSwrJvXYt+MI0AOuCrADkGTgKcpEf4MHsDwTpPbtsXP1f8Q4PX/aPCw/pfxlNtLf 7auurvW5Gtgazd1+PIAaSa2R1rGGMkN/46Bxrdois7uE6TFrsTRnXkCAze7+80ad Uhwxe6eyHwk57ZiKCNJH0bURyWpaxFCgz9YJA= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626595EAE8; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:41:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CFF255EAE7; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:41:33 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jakub =?utf-8?Q?Nar=C4=99bski?= Cc: Lars Schneider , Git mailing list , Eric Wong , Taylor Blau Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] convert: add "status=delayed" to filter process protocol References: <20170108191736.47359-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <9A1064BB-DA72-44DB-A875-39E007708A69@gmail.com> <17fa31a5-8689-2766-952b-704f433a5b3a@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 12:41:32 -0800 In-Reply-To: <17fa31a5-8689-2766-952b-704f433a5b3a@gmail.com> ("Jakub =?utf-8?Q?Nar=C4=99bski=22's?= message of "Wed, 11 Jan 2017 15:53:27 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 56E31C3C-D83E-11E6-9219-A7617B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jakub Nar=C4=99bski writes: >> Yes, this problem happens every day with filters that perform network >> requests (e.g. GitLFS).=20 > > Do I understand it correctly that the expected performance improvement > thanks to this feature is possible only if there is some amount of > parallelism and concurrency in the filter? That is, filter can be send= ing > one blob to Git while processing other one, or filter can be fetching b= lobs > in parallel. The first-object latency may not be helped, but by allowing "delayed", the latency to retrieve the second and subsequent objects can be hidden, I would think.