Hi, On Thu, 17 May 2007, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On 5/16/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 16 May 2007, Martin Langhoff wrote: > > > Do the indexes have enough info to use them with http ranges? It'd be > > > chunkier than a smart protocol, but it'd still work with dumb servers. > > It would not be really performant, would it? Besides, not all Web servers > > speak HTTP/1.1... > > Performant compared to downloading a huge packfile to get 10% of it? > Sure! It'd probably take a few trips, and you'd end up fetching 20% of > the file, still better than 100%. Don't forget that those 10% probably do not do you the favour to be in large chunks. Chances are that _every_ _single_ wanted object is separate from the others. > > Besides, not all Web servers speak HTTP/1.1... > > Are there any interesting webservers out there that don't? Hand-rolled > purpose-built webservers often don't but those don't serve files, they > serve web apps. When it comes to serving files, any webserver that is > supported (security-wise) these days is HTTP/1.1. > > And for services like SF.net it'd be a safe low-cpu way of serving git > files. 'cause the git protocol is quite expensive server-side (io+cpu) > as we've seen with kernel.org. Being really smart with a cgi is > probably going to be expensive too. It's probably better and faster than relying on a feature which does not exactly help. 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
