Re: git copies of cvs modules available

[matthew sporleder <msporleder%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Curt Sampson <cjs%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
> On 2009-12-24 11:27 +0000 (Thu), Thomas Adam wrote:
>
>> Actually, all of the dumb protocols for git (HTTP being one of them) *are*
>> inefficient.  Using git:// is efficient as you don't have to do a load of
>> translating to get the data out of the transport mechanism.
>
> While we're on the topic, do you have a reference to an explanation of
> this? I can't really see why git over http would be so much slower (and
> use so much more memory) than git over git protocol except in the case
> where one has to download a large pack for one or only a few patches,
> which is not the case in a clone.
>

I found that git over http actually uses a lot -fewer- cpu resources
than git over git://, which I think it more like a direct socket
without much protocol (similar to git over ssh://).