Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> The amount of transfer being that small was something I didn't quite >> expect, though. ÂDoesn't it indicate that our pathname based object >> clustering heuristics is not as effective as we hoped? > > I'm not sure I follow your question. I didn't see path information in your cachefile that contains C commits, T trees, etc. that sped up the object enumeration, but you didn't observe much transfer inflation over the stock git. > Ooooh. > > I think my test was flawed. I injected the cached pack's tip as the > edge for the new stuff to delta compress against. That is one of the things I was wondering. I manually created a thin pack with only the 1-month-old tip as boundary, and another with all the boundaries that can be found by rev-list. I didn't find much difference in the result, though, as "rev-list --boundary --all --not $onemontholdtip" had only a few boundary entries in my test. -- 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