Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: netsync question

[Markus Schiltknecht]

On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 05:32 -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Basically, the first sort is good for representing "what changed".
> The second sort is good when what you basically just have a bunch of
> files you want to store, that you happen to know have a lot in common
> with each other, and you want to apply really really good lossless
> compression.

Thank you for that detailed answer.

> We used to have a special case for the initial pull so it would do
> this.  It was sort of brokenly implemented, and a bit useless in the
> general case anyway.  (The initial pull problem reappears as the "I was
> on vacation for a week and now I need the pull the 500 new revisions
> that showed up while I was gone" problem, and such hacks don't help so
> much for that.)  So possibly worth considering, but maybe better to
> consider more general solutions first.

Well, my 'gap-tracking' idea (my previous mail to Bruce) would help in
both cases. Of course that needs more thinking...

> This kind of "partial pull" functionality would indeed be really nice,
> but it's _way_ more complicated than just adding some new delta
> transmission code to netsync :-).  Definitely worth doing at some
> point, but it's a major new piece of functionality, maybe not
> something to chase off after while the stuff we _do_ have working is
> too slow.

Yeah. Something like 'gap-tracking' would require quite some changes...

Thank you very much for explaination.

Markus