Maybe give clonebundles a shot? Mozilla has been using it to great success, and you can put the majority of the repo data on a CDN so it’s relatively quick to serve. From the (server-only) extension docs:
`hg help clonebundles`: > clonebundles extension - advertise pre-generated bundles to seed clones > > "clonebundles" is a server-side extension used to advertise the existence of > pre-generated, externally hosted bundle files to clients that are cloning so > that cloning can be faster, more reliable, and require less resources on the > server. [...] > This extension provides server operators the ability to offload potentially > expensive clone load to an external service. Here's how it works. > > 1. A server operator establishes a mechanism for making bundle files available > on a hosting service where Mercurial clients can fetch them. > 2. A manifest file listing available bundle URLs and some optional metadata is > added to the Mercurial repository on the server. > 3. A client initiates a clone against a clone bundles aware server. > 4. The client sees the server is advertising clone bundles and fetches the > manifest listing available bundles. > 5. The client filters and sorts the available bundles based on what it > supports and prefers. > 6. The client downloads and applies an available bundle from the server- > specified URL. > 7. The client reconnects to the original server and performs the equivalent of > 'hg pull' to retrieve all repository data not in the bundle. (The > repository could have been updated between when the bundle was created and > when the client started the clone.) > > Instead of the server generating full repository bundles for every clone > request, it generates full bundles once and they are subsequently reused to > bootstrap new clones. The server may still transfer data at clone time. > However, this is only data that has been added/changed since the bundle was > created. For large, established repositories, this can reduce server load for > clones to less than 1% of original. > On Sep 17, 2016, at 12:40 PM, Robert Vehse <robertve...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > I reckon your bandwidth is a lot higher than mine? I'd been downloading for > 20 to 30 minutes when it failed.
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail