Re: git gc and kernel.org
- From
- H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
- Date
- Oct 20, 2009, 07:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4ADD6BEA.3080300@zytor.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7veioyqzeo.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On 10/20/2009 04:48 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> As to (1), I think it is reasonable to do some sort of "gc" in > receive-pack, and while I recall that Linus was violently against the > idea, I personally think it is reasonable to run update-server-info > ourselves at the same time without needing the hook, even if the > repository is never going to be served over dumb http [*1*]. At one > point, update-server-info used to compute a lot more than what we > currently compute and it made some sense to oppose against it on > performance ground. > > But these days it only lists the refs and packs and does nothing else; the > performance impact should be immeasurable and it adds only two files to > the repository. It cannot be a big deal, unless you oppose to http > transport on a non-technical ground.
I'm obviously happy with making it a non-default option; we can enable it sitewide on kernel.org.
However, git update-server-info seems to take almost no time even in very large repos.
-hpa