Re: Local clone/fetch with cogito is glacial

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>
Date: May 22, 2006, 22:02 UTC
Message-ID: <20060522220206.GA10488@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <44722A8F.9020609@zytor.com>

Dear diary, on Mon, May 22, 2006 at 11:18:07PM CEST, I got a letter where "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> said that...

Show 15 quoted lines

> Sean wrote:
> >On Sun, 21 May 2006 16:47:45 -0700
> >"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >
> >>It appears that doing a *local* -- meaning using a file path or file URL 
> >>-- clone or fetch with cogito is just glacial when the repository has an 
> >>even moderate number of tags (and it's fetching the tags that takes all 
> >>the time.)  That's a really serious problem for me.
> >>
> >
> >Peter, does git clone work acceptably for you?
> >
> 
> Well, it does, except it doesn't set up the cogito branches (which one can 
> of course copy manually.)

What about incremental fetches using git-fetch? From a quick scan of the git-fetch automagic tags following code, it seems to be even significantly more expensive than Cogito's (in terms of number of forks).

git-clone has an advantage here since it clones _everything_ while Cogito fetches only stuff related to the branch you are cloning, and verifying if what it fetches is sensible for you unfortunately takes a lot of time. :/ I guess there is no way to verify presence of multiple objects at once and there is also no way to order local fetch of multiple objects at once.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time.  I think
I have forgotten this before.