Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-15 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: Hello, I've wondered how slow the protocols other than rsync are, and the (well, a bit dubious; especially wrt. caching on the remote side) results are: git clone-pack:ssh 25s git rsync 27s git

Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-15 Thread Daniel Barkalow
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote: Daniel Barkalow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I should be able to get http-pull down to the neighborhood of (current) ssh-pull; http-pull is that slow (when the source repository isn't packed) because it's entirely sequential, rather than

Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-13 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Linus Torvalds wrote: On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Running it over ssh would be a good way to do authentication... Well, if you have ssh as an option, you don't need git-daemon any more, since the protocol that git-daemon does runs quite well over ssh on its own... The

Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-12 Thread Petr Baudis
Hello, I've wondered how slow the protocols other than rsync are, and the (well, a bit dubious; especially wrt. caching on the remote side) results are: git clone-pack:ssh 25s git rsync 27s git http-pull 47s git dumb-http

Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-12 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: Anyway, clone-pack is a clear winner for networks (but someone should re-check that, especially compared to rsync, wrt. server-side file caching); really cool fast, but not very practical for anonymous access. git-daemon is for the anonymous access

Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-12 Thread Petr Baudis
Dear diary, on Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 04:12:26AM CEST, I got a letter where Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that... On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: Anyway, clone-pack is a clear winner for networks (but someone should re-check that, especially compared to rsync, wrt.

Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-12 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Petr Baudis wrote: In my tests, the git daemon was noticeably faster than ssh, if only because the authentication actually tends to be a big part of the overhead in small pulls. Oh. Sounds nice, are there plans to run this on kernel.org too? (So far, 90% of my GIT network activity happens

Re: Cloning speed comparison

2005-08-12 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, H. Peter Anvin wrote: Running it over ssh would be a good way to do authentication... Well, if you have ssh as an option, you don't need git-daemon any more, since the protocol that git-daemon does runs quite well over ssh on its own... The only point of git-daemon