Re: git instructions

From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: git instructions
Date: 2018-02-06 20:46:40
Message-ID: d01ca646-7dd8-8262-5b05-f9211f290b5e@kaltenbrunner.cc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02/01/2018 05:35 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:20 PM, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net
> <mailto:chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>> wrote:
>
> On 02/01/2018 10:54 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> > in saying that git:// is faster than https://. In fact, we have some
> > reports and testing that https:// can be significantly faster (due to other
> > reasons).
> Can you elaborate on the other reasons? It occurs to me that there
> might be cases in which each way works better.
>
>
> Those aren't protocol based, they're deployment based.
>
> For example, for the https we have a fast cache, for the git:// stuff it
> reloads things all the time. The git daemon also has no proper way to
> limit or handle concurrency,so tends to get hit much harder there where
> the http cache can take care of much of that. Things like that, not the
> protocol itself.

yeah, from a infrastructure perspective http(s) is much much nicer and
provides us with way more control over limiting (or accelerating) access
- so a big +1 from my side for changing the default and the
recommendation to https.

>
>
> From an experience about 3½ years ago[1], I drew a conclusion
> (which may have been erroneous, or may have changed in newer
> git releases) that the http protocol handler was not as bidirectional:
> the client was less able to negotiate with the server exactly which
> objects it already had and which were wanted, leaving the server to
> send a needlessly large mass of stuff by default, whereas git-over-ssh
> was able to negotiate a tiny minimal pack file to transfer.
>
>
> Yes, this used to be the case, and is the reason behind the original
> recommendation. It's what they call the "dumb HTTP protocol" in the
> docs. This is not the case when you use git-http-backend, which is the
> change we made a few months back.

Agreed - wrt the actual patch - not sure it is accurate to classify the
current way als the "older git protocol" as I cannot find that wording
used in the git docs - maybe "classic"? - we also might want to change
the url for http://git-scm.com/ to https://git-scm.com/ while we are
changing that page.

We also should doublecheck that the docs on
https://git.postgresql.org/adm/help/ match what we have in the main
source docs.

Stefan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2018-02-06 20:51:17 Re: Incorrect grammar
Previous Message Tom Lane 2018-02-06 20:43:29 Re: Why does load_external_function() return PGFunction?