On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Jens Lehmann <jens.lehm...@web.de> wrote: > Am 12.11.2015 um 00:34 schrieb Stefan Beller: >> >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Jens Lehmann <jens.lehm...@web.de> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> TL;DR: checkout is serial, network-related stuff only will be using >>>> submodule.jobs >>> >>> >>> >>> My point being: isn't "jobs" a bit too generic for a config option that >>> is only relevant for network-related stuff? Maybe "submodule.fetchJobs" >>> or similar would be better, as you are already thinking about adding >>> other parallelisms with different constraints later? >> >> >> Actually I don't think that far ahead. > > > Maybe I've been bitten once too often by too generic names that became > a problem later on ... ;-) > >> (I assume network to be the bottleneck for clone/fetch operations) >> All I want is a saturated network all the time, and as the native git >> protocol >> doesn't provide that (tcp startup takes time until full band witdth is >> reached, >> local operations both on client and server) I added the parallel stuff >> to 'smear' different submodule network traffics along the timeline, >> such that we have a better approximation of an always fully saturated link >> for the whole operation. So in the long term future, we maybe want to >> reuse an http/ssh session for a different submodule, possibly interleaving >> the different submodules on the wire to make it even faster. Though that >> may not be helping much. >> >> So we're back at bike shedding about the name. submodule.fetchJobs >> sounds like it only applies to fetching, do you think it's sufficient for >> clone >> as well? > > > Hmm, to me fetching is a part of cloning, so I don't have a problem with > that. And documenting it accordingly should make it clear to everyone. > >> Once upon a time, Junio used 'submodule.fetchParallel' or >> 'submodule.paralle' >> in a discussion[1] for the distinction of the local and networked things. >> [1] Discussing "[PATCH] Add fetch.recurseSubmoduleParallelism config >> option" >> >> How about submodules.parallelNetwork for the networking part and >> submodules.parallelLocal for the local part? (I don't implement >> parallelLocal in >> the next few weeks I'd estimate). > > > If 'submodules.parallelNetwork' will be used for submodule push too as > soon as that learns parallel operation, I'm ok with that. But if we don't > have good reason to believe the number of jobs for fetch can simply be > reused for push, me thinks we should have one config option containing the > term "fetch" now and another that contains "push" when we need it later, > just to be on the safe side. Otherwise it might be hard to explain to > users why 'submodules.parallelNetwork' is only used for fetch and clone > and why they have to set 'submodules.parallelPush' for pushing ... > > So either 'submodule.fetchParallel' or 'submodule.fetchJobs' is fine for > me, and 'submodules.parallelNetwork' is ok too as long as we have reason > to believe this value can be used for push later too.
Ok, got it. So fetchJobs is fine with me. Mind the difference in the first part, submodule[s] in singular/plural. I thought submodule as a prefix for any individual submodule, but any settings applying to all of the submodules, you'd take the plural submodules.* settings. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
