List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 08:31:43AM +0000, Duncan wrote:
> Micha?? G??rny posted on Sun, 03 Jun 2012 09:22:04 +0200 as excerpted:
> >> Even if only the files metatdata changes, that still adds a significant
> >> cost to an rsync.
> > I wonder when it will come to the point where git will be more efficient
> > than rsync. Or maybe it would be already?
> Handwavey guess, but I've figured git to be more efficient client-side
> for some time. Server-side I don't know about, but I've presumed that's
> the reason the switch-to-git plans haven't included switching the default
> for user-syncs to git. I expect user/client side, git would be more
> efficient already, but as I said, that's handwavey guesses.
No, the switch to git will NOT help users, it isn't more efficient.
They will still be best served by rsync, for a couple of reasons:
1. metadata cache is NOT available in Git.
2. rsync for users will actually be LESS traffic than Git.
- You can easily prove this.
- Change tree A-B-C-D
- exclude the generated metadata first of all
- Git will include all intermediate steps A..D
- rsync will jump you straight to D.
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail : email@example.com
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85