Re: [RFC] repack vs re-clone
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 11, 2008, 19:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200802112051.27271.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <e5bfff550802111120x24338cd6n6eb1f6db55fe487f@mail.gmail.com>
Marco Costalba wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> On Feb 11, 2008 7:45 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote: > > "Marco Costalba" <mcostalba@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > So it happens to be just faster to re-clone the whole thing by upstream. > > > > So what you are doing is passing the work, unnecessary work I'd say, > > to some poor server. Not nice. > > To a poor net bandwidth I would say because cloning from zero just > downloads the packages.
Cloning from zero over http, https and rsync (and ftp) just downloads the packfiles. Cloning over git or ssh if I understand correctly[*1*] generates single pack for transfer. And that generates load for server.
[*1*] If I undersnad correctly from discussions here on git mailing
list, the pack transfer protocol currently can transfer only
_single_ pack; proposed multi-pack extension didn't get
implemented.-- Jakub Narebski Poland