On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Stephan Hennig wrote: > Shawn O. Pearce schrieb: > > > We're better off keeping our memory usage low and recomputing > > the delta base when we need to return to it to process a sibling. > > Thanks to all who have had a look at this issue! From a user's > perspective I have one more suggestions and a question: > > First, it would have helped me to bring this issue onto the list if I > had earlier known that this was no misconfiguration, but a memory > problem. Well, if we had known before that this could be a problem, we'd have fixed it earlier. In other words, sh*t happens. > Even though Git now makes some efforts to substitute runtime > for memory to be able to operate with low(er) memory, I think it would > still be informative for a user that repository and hardware, resp. > core.deltaBaseCacheLimit, are, say, incompatible. If valuable objects > have to be discarded due to memory restrictions a warning could be > issued to make the user aware of this fact, e.g., > > Warning! Low memory. Git might be slowing down. Well, I disagree. First we don't know how slow git would effectively be since all (my) concerns so far were totally theoretical. It will still work better than, say, 'git verify-pack' nevertheless. And git should just do its best regardless and avoid being needlessly verbose. > Second, while there have been some changes to Git now, as a poor user, > how can I make use of that changes? I think, updating my client should > only help with pushing. For pulling, I have to wait for repo.or.cz to > update to Git 1.6.0, right? Actually that's the other way around. This change will help the receiving side of a transfer. So it should help you when pulling. 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
