# local clone much slower than remote clone

3 messages from 2005-10-01 to 2005-10-01. Participants: Jeff Garzik, Yasushi SHOJI, Junio C Hamano.
Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/1987

## Jeff Garzik, 2005-10-01 02:45

Subject: local clone much slower than remote clone
Message-ID: <433DF862.4020500@pobox.com>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/433DF862.4020500%40pobox.com

```

Case 1: remote clone

time git clone 
rsync://rsync.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git 
scsi-sas-2.6
...
real    3m36.432s
user    0m0.584s
sys     0m0.656s


Case 2: local clone
time git clone /spare/repo/linux-2.6 scsi-sas-2.6
...
Packing 99084 objects
Unpacking 99084 objects
...
real    4m31.876s
user    4m43.618s
sys     0m40.047s


Downloading an entire kernel tree over cable modem is almost a minute 
faster than a local clone!  IMHO the local clone should just hardlink 
the packs and objects, and be done with it.

	Jeff

```

## Yasushi SHOJI, 2005-10-01 04:10

Subject: Re: local clone much slower than remote clone
Message-ID: <87fyrlg9no.wl@mail2.atmark-techno.com>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/87fyrlg9no.wl%40mail2.atmark-techno.com
In-Reply-To: <433DF862.4020500@pobox.com>

```
At Fri, 30 Sep 2005 22:45:54 -0400,
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
> Downloading an entire kernel tree over cable modem is almost a minute 
> faster than a local clone!  IMHO the local clone should just hardlink 
> the packs and objects, and be done with it.

    git clone -l

perhaps?  -s would be nice too.
--
        yashi

```

## Junio C Hamano, 2005-10-01 05:57

Subject: Re: local clone much slower than remote clone
Message-ID: <7vslvlbwyt.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vslvlbwyt.fsf%40assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net
In-Reply-To: <433DF862.4020500@pobox.com>

```
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> writes:

> time git clone /spare/repo/linux-2.6 scsi-sas-2.6

    $ git clone -l -s -n

would be the fastest.

Yes, -n is an irrelevant cheating ;-).

```