From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: What's in git.git Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:15:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <7v1wxg82r3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 06 10:15:48 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FGBoc-00032y-AI for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 10:15:42 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752322AbWCFJPi (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2006 04:15:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752324AbWCFJPi (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2006 04:15:38 -0500 Received: from wrzx35.rz.uni-wuerzburg.de ([132.187.3.35]:11214 "EHLO mailrelay.uni-wuerzburg.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752320AbWCFJPh (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2006 04:15:37 -0500 Received: from virusscan.mail (mail04.mail [172.25.1.103]) by mailrelay.mail (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B4E617E8; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:15:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by virusscan.mail (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E77D5DD9; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:15:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from dumbo2 (wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de [132.187.25.13]) by mailmaster.uni-wuerzburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A88905; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:15:36 +0100 (CET) X-X-Sender: gene099@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7v1wxg82r3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at uni-wuerzburg.de Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Another thing I have started in "pu" branch is to stop placing > an object we decided to delta that is already max-depth deep > back in the delta-base window, because such a thing only wastes > the delta base slot. The changed pack-objects does pick up more > delta, but the resulting pack seems bigger and I am puzzled why. Not that I know much about the pack format, but is it possible that the deltas are deflated? In that case, a possible explanation is that a better delta is less compressible (and taken together, this could amount to more bytes). Ciao, Dscho