Re: git pack/unpack over bittorrent - works!

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

 



On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2010, A Large Angry SCM wrote:
>
>> On 09/02/2010 12:41 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>>
>> > For example, right now you already can't rely on having the exact same
>> > pack output even on the same machine using the same arguments and the
>> > same inputs simply by using threads.  As soon as you're using more than
>> > one thread (most people do these days) then your pack output becomes non
>> > deterministic.
>>
>> Finally, the real pack expert weighs in!
>
> BTW I just have a little time to quickly scan through my git mailing
> list backlog these days, and stumbled on this by luck.  So if people
> want my opinion on such matters it is safer to CC me directly.

 appreciated nicolas.  will keep it short.  ish :)

 * based on what you kindly mentioned about "git repack -f", would a
(well-written!) patch to git pack-objects to add a
"--single-thread-only" option be acceptable?

 * would you, or anyone else with enough knowledge of how this stuff
reaallly works, be willing to put some low-priority back-of-mind
thought into how to create a "canonical" pack format - one that can be
enabled with a command-line-option?  the reason i ask is because if i
even attempted such a task, i'd die of laughing (probably manically)
if it was ever accepted.  i'd rather live :)


 questions (not necessarily for nicolas) - can anyone think of any
good reasons _other_ than for multiple file-sharing to have a
"canonical" pack-object?

off the top of my head i can think of one: rsync if the transfer is
interrupted.  if the pack-objects are large - and not guaranteed to be
the same - then an interrupted rsync transfer would be a bit of a
waste of bandwidth.  however if the pack-object could always be made
the same, the partial transfer could carry on.   musing a bit
further... mmm... i supooose the same thing applies equally to http
and ftp.  it's a bit lame, i know: can anyone think of any better
reasons?

l.
--
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]