> Right, though this still subjects the remote copy to all of the > difficulty of packing large objects (though Christian's work to support > other object database implementations would go a long way to help this). Ah, interesting -- I didn't realize this step was part of the bottleneck. I presumed git didn't do much more than perhaps gzip'ing binary files when it packed them up. Or do you mean the growing cost of storing the objects locally as you work? Perhaps that could be solved by allowing the client more control (ie. delete the oldest blobs that exist on the server).
