{"thread":{"id":"1394","subject":"Parallel pull for ssh-pull","startedAt":"2005-08-02T20:02:59Z","lastAt":"2005-08-02T20:38:33Z","messageCount":2,"participants":["barkalow@iabervon.org","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"6719","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.62.0508021544430.23721@iabervon.org","threadId":"1394","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Parallel pull for ssh-pull","fromName":"","fromEmail":"barkalow@iabervon.org","sentAt":"2005-08-02T20:02:59Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-02T20:02:59Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"barkalow@iabervon.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/55364219?v=4"},"body":"I think I've now got the parallel pull use in ssh-pull to the point where \nit could be useful to post. Similar stuff should work for http-pull (where \nit will probably be more interesting), but I have to read more libcurl \ndocumentation.\n\nInitial results on ssh-pull are encouraging: on my local ethernet, I moved \nthe current git repository in 16 seconds, unpacked and with the push \nside acting dumb. I think it was requesting objects about 6 ahead of where \nit was reading them. I didn't test how much time the pipe spent empty in \nthe final version; when I was printing debugging messages, the pipe was \noften empty, but it also took 3 times as long, and was therefore probably \nblocking on debugging output, not the network.\n\nThis work is based on some now in -pu; what should I base my patches on? I \nwould ideally like to add a function to one of the patches in -pu and fix \na subtle bug in the other, in addition to further patches to actually use \nthe feature in ssh-pull.\n\n\t-Daniel\n*This .sig left intentionally blank*\n"},{"id":"6720","messageId":"7vmzo09ira.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"1394","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.62.0508021544430.23721@iabervon.org","subject":"Re: Parallel pull for ssh-pull","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2005-08-02T20:38:33Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-02T20:38:33Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"barkalow@iabervon.org writes:\n\n> This work is based on some now in -pu; what should I base my patches on? I \n> would ideally like to add a function to one of the patches in -pu and fix \n> a subtle bug in the other, in addition to further patches to actually use \n> the feature in ssh-pull.\n\nThe proposed patch queue is just a throw-away branch that I use\nfor the purpose of (1) not to lose patches from people, (2) to\nack patches from others, and (3) let people know which ones are\nunder consideration.\n\nEither a patch on top of the pu branch, or a brand new patch on\ntop of the master branch would work fine for me.  If you feel\nsome stuff that are in pu need to be fixed or cleaned up, you\nmay want choose the latter --- that way, software archaeologists\ndo not need to know that you made a mess in earlier rounds ;-).\nIf you choose to do so, I would appreciate a warning to tell me\nwhich existing patches to drop from pu, although that would\nprobably be pretty clear from the context.\n\nThanks.\n"}]}