1 |
22.01.2012, 00:55, "Fabian Groffen" <grobian@g.o>: |
2 |
> On 21-01-2012 23:44:18 +0400, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> šAdvantage: much faster emerge --sync |
5 |
> |
6 |
> proof? |
7 |
|
8 |
Well... I realize that I should put some benchmark here, however |
9 |
I thought this is just a common sense. If you ever used git, you should |
10 |
know that e.g. if almost nothing has changed on remote (regular update), |
11 |
sync time will approach zero, but rsync always needs to iterate through |
12 |
all ebuilds to check if each file doesn't change separately. |
13 |
|
14 |
Funtoo was already mentioned; team of Calculate Linux reports that |
15 |
after they switched to git for portage syncing, speed increased significantly. |
16 |
|
17 |
> |
18 |
>> šPossible migration path: |
19 |
>> š1) git init in master mirror of prefix portage tree |
20 |
>> š2) deliver files of initial .git repository via rsync |
21 |
> |
22 |
> the prefix neither the main tree aren't even in git, so it would only be |
23 |
> artificial bloat that keeps history |
24 |
|
25 |
If you used git you should know that "bloat" is not significant. It's not SVN :) |
26 |
|
27 |
with a non-existing/hard upgrade |
28 |
> path that's going to disappear as soon as we no longer need our overlay |
29 |
|
30 |
Sorry, I haven't thought of it. Is there upgrade path from rsync btw? |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
Regards, |
34 |
Konstantin |