Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 15 May 2005 14:23:29 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: Mercurial 0.4e vs git network pull |
| |
Matt Mackall wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 04:22:19AM -0700, Adam J. Richter wrote: > >>On Sun, 15 May 2005 10:54:05 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: >> >>>Dear diary, on Thu, May 12, 2005 at 10:57:35PM CEST, I got a letter >>>where Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> told me that... >>> >>>>Does this need an HTTP request (and round trip) per object? It appears >>>>to. That's 2200 requests/round trips for my 800 patch benchmark. >> >>>Yes it does. On the other side, it needs no server-side CGI. But I guess >>>it should be pretty easy to write some kind of server-side CGI streamer, >>>and it would then easily take just a single HTTP request (telling the >>>server the commit ID and receiving back all the objects). >> >> I don't understand what was wrong with Jeff Garzik's previous >>suggestion of using http/1.1 pipelining to coalesce the round trips. > > > You can't do pipelining if you can't look ahead far enough to fill the pipe.
Even if you cannot fill a pipeline, HTTP/1.1 is sufficiently useful simply by removing the per-request connection overhead.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |