On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Shawn Pearce wrote:
quoted text
> 
> Actually there is a point to storing thin packs.  When I pull from
> a remote repo (or push to a remote repo) a huge number of objects
> and the target disk that is about to receive that huge number of
> loose objects is slooooooooow I would rather just store the thin
> pack then store the loose objects.
> 
> Ideally that thin pack would be repacked (along with the other
> existing packs) as quickly as possible into a self-contained pack.
> But that of course is unlikely to happen in practice; especially
> on a push.

I'm really nervous about keeping thin packs around. 

But a possibly good (and fairly simple) alternative would be to just 
create a non-thin pack on the receiving side. Right now we unpack into a 
lot of loose objects, but it should be possible to instead "unpack" into a 
non-thin pack.

In other words, we could easily still use the thin pack for communication, 
we'd just "fill it out" on the receiving side.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html