From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4FC92018B for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 19:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751790AbcGRTQM (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:16:12 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]:35566 "EHLO mail-wm0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751665AbcGRTQL (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:16:11 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id f65so115281966wmi.0 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:16:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5vdKDvKWdM6ssnp/y6pUOXDCY+4BC5PhgWejNvaQP1w=; b=PMMb3rvPewq65GFyakHuMgXa9whLTsXWP0QcSISsKAOej58cKASGG51epIjitCaWb2 1Mht1D03UAS9PxWNDQBxqqafpOwXiojVXYLeqRWn8h91g0PEZ+ofNbrWA8KEYMp/INaw DyQVZ9Y4qYR6LQe15LzTn+7JyRmaL7Mr5Ln24ZlFwjhK3naJqTpVbqt9KAEMFXaoDOBx ORjEztg4QimWrKSuxPMQa7C/EKi63oc9o3nUEL32J5YUAwW4etCBJuTI4akaLyG7tdKM 1Mf/HSf6sKXMVvj5iPic6jmLA/byUnEXRdAkGGsuVck3XtfKDXPZGj/QHIlhh8JLo9GA 6v/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5vdKDvKWdM6ssnp/y6pUOXDCY+4BC5PhgWejNvaQP1w=; b=PHnCxAgFfP614C1HbHyYtwCU2T2Lwjr04zaD6QQ5aDMnenpOVK8xKbQxCSOd1nVi8C Sg0Nyc5FbRggN4drTJohKt98N5Ga3Avw9F5YtC8FzcEl3LJ4IMH/Vg4qvxBpv1dc30UL Th0lvDEPtrHTlyyPZLzcGyBqP5TmEMS+rjT/kBhPYfYiy5B1jxGJQWDqLHYDsh5RGRxR MOC0huHPWOxg1F4eyX8V4MPLlv82Rny6saikr5Ojy+J6R0hI49FE7ID44HSFdrXzPlZV VPk4zW0M0hqXaQmtnVSYDfUyDNpsHPfYADFPs8YTFTt5I5T0HntAqkHzmxKoS5S8Zdv5 UKYQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tL8jk88wfPMxozcjwrsbUNTQF6PrdVCI3cJNwgruTwDZCQVCcjWzj5tJtvTxyJK0AqJXWSw7FQYnSTY5t+Z X-Received: by 10.28.153.70 with SMTP id b67mr20707wme.84.1468869369909; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:16:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.167.87 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:16:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1468867019-13086-1-git-send-email-jonathantanmy@google.com> <20160718185527.GB29326@google.com> From: Jonathan Tan Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:16:09 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] fetch-pack: grow stateless RPC windows exponentially To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Beller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I'd understand if it were more like "aggressive exponential -> > conservative exponential" without linear phase when stateless_rpc is > in use, though. I just do not quite understand the justification > behind the order of three phases introduced by this change. Adding conservative exponential phase after the aggressive exponential phase was the original intention, but the conservative exponential approach (e.g. n' = n * 11 / 10) is slower than the existing linear (n' = n + 1024) approach when n < 10240, so I added that intermediate phase to avoid a regression in the packet size growth.