On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > Dana How <danahow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > (there was an alternate blob format that supported this, > > but it was deprecated). Using the pack format for blobs > > would fix this. It would also mean blobs wouldn't need to > > be uncompressed to get the blob type or size I believe. > > The alternate format for loose objects *was* the packfile format, > but without the packfile header or trailer as that was really > quite unnecessary for a single object storage. What I'm suggesting, though, is to actually create a real pack for those blobs where the recompression is really an issue. all the code is there and only needs to be called. In most usage cases, though, the proportion of blobs that gets copied directly into a pack is minimal, and even then they don't amount to a lot of cycles compared to the majority of deltified objects. (yeah, "deltified" is said to be wrong by some, but it is really convenient a word.) > I was sad when Nico removed the format in 726f852b0ed7e. I can > understand why he did so but I think it was a move in the wrong > direction. I wish I could convince you otherwise by now. Nicolas - 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
