From: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 07:51:06 GMT
Subject: Re: git gc and kernel.org
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:
> 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