From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:51:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] repack vs re-clone
Message-ID: <200802112051.27271.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e5bfff550802111120x24338cd6n6eb1f6db55fe487f@mail.gmail.com>

Marco Costalba wrote:
> 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