Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 00:53:40
Message-Id: CAGfcS_kn7hPixtkSgpY17tdW1V0m5j2+QHyRwLp63v1odVzOJg@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by Michael Weber
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Michael Weber <xmw@g.o> wrote:
> > Cloning the repo [1] takes 200seconds on 8cores (it's 2GB of data and > 22 minutes of 3.4GHz cpus). >
As others have pointed out, probably the best way to bootstrap this is to offer tarballs of a shallow repository and a full repository. Perhaps we'd offer the latter as a torrent. The shallow repository should be light on the CPU too. This would be a lot easier on the server than having everybody and their uncle doing a full 2GB clone. Devs could then do a pull to get the latest and greatest, and that would only transfer the delta. I imagine our mirror network can handle the bandwidth compared to what we're already doing with distfiles. Worst case we could take a one-time hit and use S3 or whatever to do the distribution (they even support bittorrent to cut down on the bill). Rich

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>