Re: "git-send-pack"

Linus Torvalds wrote:

Also, note that the server is usually _more_ ahead than the client is, and 
the server is the one that potentially has lots of commits that the 
client doesn't have. Not the other way around. So if the client makes a 
list of it's top commits, it almost certainly won't have to make a very 
long list until the server can tell it "ok, stop, I've seen it".

Yeah, maybe we want to limit the "burst" to 70 sha1's, since that will fit 
in a regular-sized ethernet packet, but whatever - you'd burst out your 
commits "latest first", so you'd never even get to the current 4040 unless 
you've literally done the kind of work we've done in the git tree for the 
last 3 months _and_you've_not_pulled_from_that_server_in_the_whole_time_.

You are getting closer and closer to where something like bitTorrent or 
a multicast protocol makes sense. The problem isn't just the number of 
outstanding commit objects but the number of machines and developers 
that want to grab those commits at the same time.


Mike Taht
PostCards From The Bleeding Edge
http://the-edge.blogspot.com "Tempel 1 worth 2.2 million trillion bux"