From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Sb7Cj-0005E7-Pk for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Jun 2012 09:34:34 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4D061E00D3; Sun, 3 Jun 2012 09:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25321E0741 for ; Sun, 3 Jun 2012 09:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (87-205-24-5.ip.netia.com.pl [87.205.24.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 90B5B1B4007; Sun, 3 Jun 2012 09:32:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 11:34:07 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: robbat2@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: metadata/md5-cache Message-ID: <20120603113407.35ab0787@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <20120603092204.41c66ada@pomiocik.lan> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/zoDRPDwKXK3JghkdxPcCh=J"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: aea0c63c-a5c0-4b6c-ab0f-ec8b9eb508e2 X-Archives-Hash: 02ac7cf5364e6ce0e00d65264ec8bd19 --Sig_/zoDRPDwKXK3JghkdxPcCh=J Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 09:25:43 +0000 "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > 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: > >=20 > > >> 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. >=20 > They will still be best served by rsync, for a couple of reasons: > 1. metadata cache is NOT available in Git. I means using separate proto for metadata, not necesarrily git. In any case, if it comes to transferring a lot of frequently-changing files, rsync is not that efficient... --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/zoDRPDwKXK3JghkdxPcCh=J Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJsEAQEIAAYFAk/LL5AACgkQfXuS5UK5QB2QxgP4qGTLc67C/Gb8RXMAEvn8LY/U cKAd7zt9k0h8NZbdsP0TvMUSOXnj3ooTRSzwZNyq/go6ynPF4jBkpVmIuFIGFbld AjYfEIFNPHxGBguL59U7XbrgJEfRidqEnEO0kB5yobXYLNJmbmMnQozmEM2S44dr AFb2PXs8tZCjCrl1Dg== =+l3o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/zoDRPDwKXK3JghkdxPcCh=J--