[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing
From: |
arnold |
Subject: |
Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing |
Date: |
Thu, 09 Jan 2025 01:13:15 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Heirloom mailx 12.5 7/5/10 |
Bob,
I can't really speak to what you've said. I only note that https://
from Savannah is quite slow, whereas if I https:// clone a Github
repo, it's quite fast. I suspect that Github is what has set
my expectatations.
For day-to-day work, obviously, I use ssh. But only a few people
in the world have ssh access to the gawk repo; the rest use https://
or git://. I know that Github disabled git:// access some years
ago, I think out of security concerns --- so out of habit I always
use https:// for Git repos.
Hmmm...
> $ time git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/gawk.git
I don't think I knew about this option. I will update the gawk doc
with this URL.
Thanks,
Arnold
Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> wrote:
> arnold@skeeve.com wrote:
> > Things are better at the moment (it's ~ 2:30 AM east coast time).
> > But... Although an https clone no longer pegs my CPU at 100%, it still
> > sucks:
> >
> > $ time git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/r/gawk.git
> > Cloning into 'gawk'...
> > Fetching objects: 61396, done.
> >
> > real 11m34.265s
> > user 0m39.351s
> > sys 0m6.825s
>
> There are two problems with the above. One is that of course the
> https:// protocol has more overhead and must compete with all of the
> abuse agents that are always hammering on the web service. It's
> probably never going to be as fast as using the ssh:// protocol.
>
> But two is that the above is using the raw web file access URL. Why?
> That's never going to be as efficient as the git smart http protocol.
> That's intentionally choosing the worst possible source to clone.
>
> Example from my system in Colorado which should be a fair test going
> across the net from a distance using the git smart http protocol.
>
> rwp@madness:/tmp/junk$ time git clone
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/gawk.git
> Cloning into 'gawk'...
> remote: Counting objects: 61396, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (14478/14478), done.
> remote: Total 61396 (delta 48459), reused 58396 (delta 46267)
> Receiving objects: 100% (61396/61396), 66.18 MiB | 2.61 MiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (48459/48459), done.
>
> real 1m11.502s
> user 0m41.194s
> sys 0m0.970s
>
> I have sometimes thought that we should remove the /r/ raw access
> path. But as you know breaking something that people are using upsets
> them because it breaks something they were working using.
>
> At one time I believe the /r/ path was needed for people behind
> restrictive firewalls and broken http proxies to be able access the
> repository regardless of their bad environments. During the http://
> days. But now with https:// use one can't proxy through and that
> already blocks bad corporate http proxies. And bad firewalls already
> are unhappy that they can't see into encrypted https connections.
> Which makes this very odd niche access method pretty much obsolete.
>
> Bob
- [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Aharon Robbins, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Corwin Brust, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, arnold, 2025/01/07
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, arnold, 2025/01/08
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing, Bob Proulx, 2025/01/08
- Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Having trouble pushing,
arnold <=