From 434a1423c016d5002b7cd1d1482ca5aca15eab66 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Atemu Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 12:35:28 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- ...omment_4_d2896b544d6d26663b532735c3924134._comment | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/Copying_many_files_to_bup_remotes_is_very_slow/comment_4_d2896b544d6d26663b532735c3924134._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/Copying_many_files_to_bup_remotes_is_very_slow/comment_4_d2896b544d6d26663b532735c3924134._comment b/doc/bugs/Copying_many_files_to_bup_remotes_is_very_slow/comment_4_d2896b544d6d26663b532735c3924134._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..4e52bc45ad --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/Copying_many_files_to_bup_remotes_is_very_slow/comment_4_d2896b544d6d26663b532735c3924134._comment @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="Atemu" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/d1f0f4275931c552403f4c6707bead7a" + subject="comment 4" + date="2022-08-10T12:35:27Z" + content=""" +Indeed it does. I assumed it'd concatenate the files internally for efficiency but is still able to output them separately later but that is not the case. I guess you could store the offsets externally and skip/seek but that'd be inefficient. +Perhaps bup could add an option for batching multiple singular-file splits in one invocation to avoid overhead. + +Alternatively, git-annex could index+save using excludes. That could be quite complicated (especially tracking which object exists inside which batches) but it could work. +"""]]