Received: from spf1.us4.outblaze.com (spf1.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.23]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iAR0BtpY013629 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:11:56 GMT Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [199.232.76.165]) by spf1.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FFD53CA4 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:11:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CXqLB-0004ca-1p for migo@homemail.com; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:21:29 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CXqJw-0004a4-Hz for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:20:12 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CXqJu-0004Yt-Bq for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:20:10 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CXqJt-0004Yd-VA for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:20:10 -0500 Received: from [63.246.10.45] (helo=Abulafia.hcoop.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.34) id 1CXqAa-0002Ic-14 for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:10:32 -0500 Received: from 1cust27.tnt4.laf1.deu.da.uu.net ([149.225.30.27] helo=aku.anet) by Abulafia.hcoop.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CXqAY-0001tA-EO for gnu-arch-users@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:10:31 +0000 Received: by aku.anet (Postfix, from userid 500) id 35CB15C584; Sat, 27 Nov 2004 01:11:19 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 01:11:19 +0100 From: Andre Kuehne To: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org Message-ID: <20041127001119.GA7514@aku> Mail-Followup-To: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org References: <20041126151216.GA8542@aku> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Improving Archive Cached Revisions X-BeenThere: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: a discussion list for all things arch-ish List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org Status: RO Content-Length: 1749 Lines: 46 Matthieu Moy wrote: > If you search for "delta compression" or if my memory's good, "summary > delta" on this list, you'll find some discussions on the topic, yes. Okay after going through the two recommended threads, i'd like to say that Aaron's proposal would let me do pretty much what i had in mind. Regarding the other (partly very complex) caching schemes (which are meant to work mostly without user intervention): I doubt one of them is optimal in every way (disk, cpu, bandwidth usage, number of transmitted changesets, whatever). Every project is different in disk quota, project activity and size, number of archive users, archive location and availability. And archive maintainers may differ in what goods they value most. Therefore i really like the way archive cached revs work: You can put them where you want, when you want. They just should be cheaper in the sense of disk usage. So i don't think arbitrary deltas (and i think of them as enhanced archive cached revs) are too much flexibility from a users POV. The analogy to backups is indeed obvious. There, you have full, incremental and differential backups. You can combine them in any way to meet your needs. If this is too complex for anyone, he can use some standard scheme or program. Until now, tla provides basic operations and leaves it to third party tools to provide more high level services. I would consider adding the ability of creating arbitrary deltas very much in this tradition. Best Regards -- _ _ _/\_| |_( )_ Andre Kuehne _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/