On 06-08-2011 22:42:33 +0200, Krzysztof Pawlik wrote: > To be honest I don't like that idea. I don't see any benefits from doing so: > - tree generation is dynamic - actually I think this is a disadvantage, it > has > a nice potential to eat a lot of resources on master rsync server, also having > different "flavours" of the tree only brings in added complexity
To be honest, I don't see any problem there. The rsync master server is a modern machine. Generating multiple trees, hardly takes more since all repos in use are shared, of course. With the prefix rsync tree generation [1] in mind, I think the extra cost timewise aren't too bad either. > So: > - having it all in single repository means that I need to care only about one > thing, not around 14956 of them subtrees would help you here > - git was designed to be efficient with large repositories, use this ability I'm not claiming git is inefficient. I think our current model is not very flexible. An alternatives like the one I proposed solves certain problems that currently exist within Gentoo. [1] http://stats.prefix.freens.org/timing-rsync0.png -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
