Re: [RFC][RESEND][PATCH] Allow fetching from multiple repositories at once

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:

>   Hi!
> 
> Dear diary, on Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 07:54:10PM CEST, I got a letter
> where Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> said that...
> > On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear diary, on Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 07:23:01PM CEST, I got a letter
> > > where Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> said that...
> > > > I still firmly believe that it would be way more efficient to fetch all 
> > > > those branches into _one_ proxy repository. Especially since you can reuse 
> > > > the objects with an alternate, which has an additional benefit over your 
> > > > approach.
> > > 
> > >   Huh? You can reuse the objects with my approach as well. Actually, it
> > > is automagically done so.
> > > 
> > >   With proxy repository, you would still need a server-side setup to
> > > maintain that repository, and specialized client-side porcelain to fetch
> > > from it. My approach initially requires some core changes (which aren't
> > > very pretty as it is but are not very fundamental or logically intrusive
> > > either) but in the longer run it pays off since you don't need a
> > > convoluted server-side setup for that.
> > 
> > No, you do not need _any_ server-side setup. And you do not need any 
> > specialized client-side porcelain other than a script, which just does 
> > the job.
> 
>   So how should the proxy repository be set up at the server side? I can
> just imagine a cronjob periodically sweeping the repositories and
> populate the proxy repository with new stuff (refs and objects) from
> those.
> 
>   Looking at what you wrote again, you talk about fetching all those
> branches _into_ one proxy repository. Perhaps we misunderstand each
> other. This patch is not about the "into" part, it is about being able
> to fetch _FROM_ _multiple_ repositories.

Indeed, I misunderstood.

Hmmm. Did you test if this makes things better? If so, could you test with 
one proxy repo on the server? I bet that this would be even more 
efficient.

And the proxy repo would be updated best by a hook, not a cronjob.

The thing is, your patch optimizes for a very special case, which special 
case IMHO should be handled differently to begin with.

Ciao,
Dscho

-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]