From: Michael S. Tsirkin Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:30:10 GMT Subject: Re: git fetch -v not at all verbose? Message-ID: <20100121173010.GB16707@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20100121165737.GG19078@spearce.org> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 08:57:37AM -0800, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 08:18:58AM -0800, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > > On many of my trees (with linux kernel), git fetch is slower than git clone. > > > > Even more annoyingly, it would hang sometimes for tens of minutes without any > > > > output, even if -v is supplied. > ... > > > Given the symptom, it sounds to me like your local repository > > > is some 1,000s of commits ahead of the remote repository you are > > > fetching from. Is that true? > > > > Hmm, no, but what is true is that I fetched several remotes > > that diverged significantly into the same local repository. > > Would that have same effect? > > Yes. > > > > Are you fetching from a configured remote that has tracking branches, > > > or are you fetching through a one-shot URL pasted onto the command > > > line? > > > > Configured remote. > > Hmm. I wonder if we should try to shortcut the commit walking in > a case like this and just feed the tracking branches we already have. Or for the case of 1,000s of commits ahead, git could try to implement a heuristic to reduce the number of commits sent. Currently all commits are sent in order, correct? How about binary search like what git bisect does? > -- > Shawn.