From: Matt Mackall Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 17:39:23 GMT Subject: Re: Mercurial 0.4e vs git network pull Message-ID: <20050515173923.GK5914@waste.org> In-Reply-To: <200505151122.j4FBMJa01073@adam.yggdrasil.com> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 04:22:19AM -0700, Adam J. Richter wrote: > On Sun, 15 May 2005 10:54:05 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > >Dear diary, on Thu, May 12, 2005 at 10:57:35PM CEST, I got a letter > >where Matt Mackall told me that... > >> Does this need an HTTP request (and round trip) per object? It appears > >> to. That's 2200 requests/round trips for my 800 patch benchmark. > > >Yes it does. On the other side, it needs no server-side CGI. But I guess > >it should be pretty easy to write some kind of server-side CGI streamer, > >and it would then easily take just a single HTTP request (telling the > >server the commit ID and receiving back all the objects). > > I don't understand what was wrong with Jeff Garzik's previous > suggestion of using http/1.1 pipelining to coalesce the round trips. You can't do pipelining if you can't look ahead far enough to fill the pipe. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.