On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 07:19:02PM -0800, Stefan O'Rear wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 07:12:45PM -0800, David Roundy wrote: > > Still on my todo list (of issues that you've reported): > > > > 2. figuring out a nice way to speed up a lazy darcs get. Currently it > > grabs each file in the repository individually. This means we're not > > harmed by long history, but we suffer greatly in repositories having > > many small files. Note that these grabs are cached (if you enable a > > cache) so a second get of the same (or a similar) repository would be > > lightning fast. But something should be done to (perhaps optionally) > > speed up darcs gets. Perhaps we could download a tarball of > > _darcs/pristine.hashed with which to seed the cache (or our own > > prisine.hashed). We could do similarly with the patches directory, in > > fact. And in neither case would an "old" tarball harm us in any way > > (except requiring that we grab a few more files). > > My (incomplete) understanding is that the majority of the cost consists > of round trips (request -> responce, and TCP handshakes) - so just > adding HTTP/1.1 pipelining support to Darcs should give almost all of > the benefits of a tarball, without requiring a new repository format. > (Darcs' non-use of pipelining is also a frequent point of snickering, if > you care about such things).
Do you have any idea how to do this? -- David Roundy Department of Physics Oregon State University
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel