Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> writes: > Notice that with "recent" Git versions, ofs-delta objects are > preferred over ref-delta objects and ref-delta objects have no reason > to be present in a clone pack.
It is true that we try to use ofs-delta as much as possible, but where does "have no reason to be present" come from? When an object cannot be represented as an ofs-delta (which can only refer backwards), don't we use ref-delta, instead of storing it as a deflated-full object? Probably "Not so ancient versions of Git tries to use ofs-delta encoding whenever possible, so it is expected that objects encoded using ref-delta are minority" may be closer to the truth. And that observation does justify why using two separate pools (one with 8-byte entries for ofs-delta, the other with 20-byte entries for ref-delta) is a better idean than using one pool with 20-byte entries for both kinds. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
