From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Oeser Subject: Re: Using git for code deployment on webservers? Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:42:42 +0200 Message-ID: <200906171942.43002.ioe-lkml@rameria.de> References: <200906160111.47325.ioe-git@rameria.de> <20090616071328.GB6615@lifeintegrity.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org, ioe-git@rameria.de X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 17 19:40:45 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MGz7r-0000ug-W3 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:40:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756062AbZFQRkL (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:40:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755976AbZFQRkK (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:40:10 -0400 Received: from smtprelay03.ispgateway.de ([80.67.31.26]:56942 "EHLO smtprelay03.ispgateway.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753358AbZFQRkJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:40:09 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 929 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:40:09 EDT Received: from [91.62.59.75] (helo=axel.localnet) by smtprelay03.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1MGz7K-0004PE-TJ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:40:11 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.2 (Linux/2.6.28-11-generic; KDE/4.2.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20090616071328.GB6615@lifeintegrity.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-Df-Sender: 849595 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi Allan, On Tuesday 16 June 2009, Allan Wind wrote: > If you do not mind having a full repository on the web servers, > then pushing changes might work better. This appears to be what > you are doing now though. No, at the moment we have built our own version of a content addressable filesystem and are distributing changes to it. We have symlinks to real file names. I just thought, that git can do sth. similiar with its core, before trying to solve a solved problem :-) > If I had to scale this I would probably build a master image > (either locally or remotely) and use rsync to distribute the > content instead of git. We do sth. similiar at the moment. De-duplication is important, because web people copy lots of data for images and flash around when doing things. > > - Nearly atomic update of file tree (easy to implement outside git) > > stow can be handy for this. Ah! Will have a look. Many Thanks! Best Regards Ingo Oeser