Re: More on git over HTTP POST

Petr Baudis [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, Aug 02, 2008 at 02:08:28PM -0700, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

quoted

I know one very big company who cannot use or support Git because
Git over HTTP is too slow to be useful.  They support other tools
like Subversion instead.  :-|

On what projects? I'm currently using Git over HTTP (read-only) a lot
and it doesn't seem really all that impractical to me. Maybe just using
a more dumb-friendly packing scheme could help a lot?

They tested by taking the SVN source code and importing it into
both Git and Hg, then cloned them both over a WAN link.  Git was
22x slower.  I suspect they didn't pack the Git repository at all,
so Git had to issue thousands of HTTP GET requests for the loose
objects.  But I also suspect there was bias in the testing so they
didn't realize they needed to repack, and didn't care to find out.

I've probably already said too much.  I'm under NDAs.

But anyway.  The point I was trying to make was that there are
not just some proxy servers, but also some server platforms, that
cannot handle bidirectional communiction.  E.g. servers that are
behind reverse proxies, where the reverse proxy is acting as a sort
of firewall or content cache accelerator.

-- 
Shawn.