On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Shawn Pearce wrote: > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 13:51, Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Shawn Pearce wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 09:11, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Narrow/Subtree clone is still just an idea, but can pack cache support > >> > be made to resumable initial narrow clone too? > >> > >> This would be very hard to do. We could do cached packs for a popular > >> set of path specifications (e.g. Documentation/ if documentation only > >> editing is common), but once we start getting random requests for path > >> specifications that we cannot predict in advance and pre-pack we'd > >> have to fall back to the normal enumerate code path. > > > > Also... people interested in Narrow clones are likely to be shallow > > clone users too, right? > > I think that depends. Some users might want the full history of the > files they are working on. Others wouldn't care and just want the tip > revision so they can make changes. Obviously a shallow clone of depth > 1 is very cheap to implement on the server; there really isn't any > caching required. > > Probably 50% want full history, 50% want shallow clone. So I doubt we > can assume that narrow implies shallow and thus is cheap. :-( Let's see what happens when this gets used in the wild. Nicolas