Re: [PATCH] Introduce a filter-path argument to git-daemon, for doing custom path transformations

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 14, 2009, 18:23 UTC
Message-ID: <7vprgkarq5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <9e0f31700903140739g26be7981lb0fa411cdd8029e6@mail.gmail.com>

Johan Sørensen <johan@johansorensen.com> writes:

Show 32 quoted lines

>> Do you run git-daemon from inetd, or standalone, by the way?
>
> Standalone.
>
>> I am wondering how well it would scale if you spawn an external "filter path"
>> script every time you get a request.
>
> A quick test of 250 consecutive requests with ls-remote to localhost
> (all without the --verbose flag), slowest run:
> - Baseline (no --filter-path agument): 3.39s
>
> $ cat filter.c
> #import "stdio.h"
> int main (int argc, char const *argv[]) {
> 	printf("%s", "/existing.git\0");
> 	return 0;
> }
> - 3.84s
>
> $ cat filter.rb
> #!/usr/bin/ruby
> print "/existing.git\0"
> - 4.76s
>
> So, obviously highly dependent on how long it takes the script to
> launch and how much work it does. And yes, neither of the above really
> does anything :) nor takes any increased cpu load into account
>
> Another approach is to keep the external script running and feed it on
> stdin, but that would involve a bit more micro-management of the
> external process. I will revisit that idea if I find out that's
> needed.

I actually was hoping (especially we have Dscho on Cc: list) that somebody like you would start suggesting a "plug in" approach to load .so files, which would lead to a easy-to-port dso support with the help from msysgit folks we can use later in other parts of the system (e.g. customizable filters used for diff textconv, clean/smudge, etc.)

Show 6 quoted lines

>> (by the way, "filter path" sounds as if it checks and conditionally
>> denies access to, or something like that, which is not what you are using
>> it for.  It is more about rewriting paths, a la mod_rewrite, and I think
>> the option is misnamed)
>
> Maybe --rewrite-script or --rewrite-command  instead?

Perhaps.