Hi Daniel, On Tuesday 16 June 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > You should be able to have the slave repositories store tags for tree > objects (instead of commit objects), and have the webservers fetch those. > You'll still have the object database, but it will only contain stuff > that's been deployed to that webserver, not intermediate versions or > historical versions. Ah, that sound like a great solution. I'll try that. > You'll still have to store both the repo and the checked out data > (but git stores the content delta-compressed against each > other in one big file, normally, so there really aren't files to hard link > to. Ok. That was under the assumption, that the core of git is basically a content addressable file system. But that seems to be history :-) > Of course, the other possibility is to check out versions on the slaves, > and rsync that to the webservers, which is probably the optimal method if > you're not in a situation where you benefit from anything git does in > transit. I would benefit from noticing local changes. But simple rsync is what is tried now. Problem is, we get no de-duplication from rsync, which git could do. Many thanks for your suggestions! Best Regards Ingo Oeser -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html