Re: "git-send-pack"
- From
- H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
- Date
- Jul 2, 2005, 04:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <42C61351.10306@zytor.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507011831060.2977@ppc970.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Show 20 quoted lines
> > Also, the number of people involved isn't _that_ big. We're talking a few > thousand people who actively would update their trees for a big project, > and many smaller projects have anything from a couple to maybe a hundred. > A few mirrors, and you don't have any problem. > > So I think that the problem is actually not that big, and we just need to > find an acceptable format. Quite frankly, it might be perfectly acceptable > for kernel.org to run a simple packing script once a week which packs > everything into one single file, and even if that means that the mirrors > will have to re-get everything once a week, that actually sounds > acceptable. > > It's obviously a _stupid_ way to handle the rsync problem, so there's > bound to be some cleaner solution, but the point is that we can probably > make mirroring acceptable even with a really really stupid approach. I'd > be a bit ashamed of just how ugly it is, but it would likely _work_ fine. > You'd create 52 pack-files in a year, but each pack-file is likely just > ten megabytes each. >
Any reason not to simply append objects to an existing packfile? It really seems like an easy solutions, and should have relatively good I/O patterns to boot simply because it naturally creates a topological sort of the objects.
-hpa