* Split commit graphs and commit-graph read
@ 2019-11-08 23:41 Bryan Turner
2019-11-11 1:19 ` Derrick Stolee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Turner @ 2019-11-08 23:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Git Users
Just a quick question about a behavior I've noticed with the commit
graph. (Amazing feature, by the way!)
If the _very first_ write done is split:
git commit-graph write --reachable --split
You end up with something like this:
.../objects$ ls -R info
info:
commit-graphs packs
info/commit-graphs:
commit-graph-chain graph-6612fcc8fd04d3af2cc268a6bd9161ae40f5fcbf.graph
info/commit-graph doesn't exist, but I have a 1-graph "chain" in
place. (And subsequent write --split calls write additional ones; I've
got a few now in this repository, but still no info/commit-graph.)
git commit-graph verify seems happy:
.../objects$ git commit-graph verify
Verifying commits in commit graph: 100% (98768/98768), done.
But git commit-graph read isn't:
.../objects$ git commit-graph read
fatal: Could not open commit-graph
'/path/to/repository/objects/info/commit-graph': No such file or
directory
Running some tests with commands like git for-each-ref and git
rev-list shows that the "split" commit graph is being used (setting
core.commitGraph=false makes commands noticeably slower), so
functionally all seems well. But should git commit-graph read be
handling this better?
Best regards,
Bryan Turner
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Split commit graphs and commit-graph read
2019-11-08 23:41 Split commit graphs and commit-graph read Bryan Turner
@ 2019-11-11 1:19 ` Derrick Stolee
2019-11-11 2:09 ` Junio C Hamano
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Derrick Stolee @ 2019-11-11 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Turner, Git Users, peff@peff.net, gitster@pobox.com
On 11/8/2019 6:41 PM, Bryan Turner wrote:
Hi Bryan,
> Just a quick question about a behavior I've noticed with the commit
> graph. (Amazing feature, by the way!)
> If the _very first_ write done is split:
> git commit-graph write --reachable --split
>
> You end up with something like this:
> .../objects$ ls -R info
> info:
> commit-graphs packs
>
> info/commit-graphs:
> commit-graph-chain graph-6612fcc8fd04d3af2cc268a6bd9161ae40f5fcbf.graph
>
> info/commit-graph doesn't exist, but I have a 1-graph "chain" in
> place. (And subsequent write --split calls write additional ones; I've
> got a few now in this repository, but still no info/commit-graph.)
>
> git commit-graph verify seems happy:
> .../objects$ git commit-graph verify
> Verifying commits in commit graph: 100% (98768/98768), done.
This workflow seems expected.
> But git commit-graph read isn't:
> .../objects$ git commit-graph read
> fatal: Could not open commit-graph
> '/path/to/repository/objects/info/commit-graph': No such file or
> directory
>
> Running some tests with commands like git for-each-ref and git
> rev-list shows that the "split" commit graph is being used (setting
> core.commitGraph=false makes commands noticeably slower), so
> functionally all seems well. But should git commit-graph read be
> handling this better?
Unfortunately, you're running into an issue because I designed the
"read" subcommand poorly (and also forgot to update it for
incremental commit-graph files). The biggest issue is that "read"
is not really meant for end-users. It really should have been built
as a test-tool. This point was corrected when I got around to writing
the multi-pack-index since it uses "test-tool read-midx" instead of
add.
To fix this issue, I would probably go about it by removing the "read"
subcommand and creating a "test-tool read-commit-graph" for the tests
that need that output.
If others on-list think that the better thing to do is to update the
"read" subcommand to provide the same output, but iterate over each
layer of an incremental commit-graph, then I can do that work instead.
Thanks,
-Stolee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Split commit graphs and commit-graph read
2019-11-11 1:19 ` Derrick Stolee
@ 2019-11-11 2:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-11 3:29 ` Jeff King
2019-11-12 0:28 ` Bryan Turner
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2019-11-11 2:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Derrick Stolee; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users, peff@peff.net
Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> writes:
> To fix this issue, I would probably go about it by removing the "read"
> subcommand and creating a "test-tool read-commit-graph" for the tests
> that need that output.
>
> If others on-list think that the better thing to do is to update the
> "read" subcommand to provide the same output, but iterate over each
> layer of an incremental commit-graph, then I can do that work instead.
I think moving it to test-tool is a good idea, whether the output
presents a single result that consolidates all layers together, or
allows to name just a single layer and shows its contents. I do not
have a strong opinion between the two (both sounds usable debugging
aid).
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Split commit graphs and commit-graph read
2019-11-11 1:19 ` Derrick Stolee
2019-11-11 2:09 ` Junio C Hamano
@ 2019-11-11 3:29 ` Jeff King
2019-11-12 0:28 ` Bryan Turner
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff King @ 2019-11-11 3:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Derrick Stolee; +Cc: Bryan Turner, Git Users, gitster@pobox.com
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 08:19:20PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > Running some tests with commands like git for-each-ref and git
> > rev-list shows that the "split" commit graph is being used (setting
> > core.commitGraph=false makes commands noticeably slower), so
> > functionally all seems well. But should git commit-graph read be
> > handling this better?
>
> Unfortunately, you're running into an issue because I designed the
> "read" subcommand poorly (and also forgot to update it for
> incremental commit-graph files). The biggest issue is that "read"
> is not really meant for end-users. It really should have been built
> as a test-tool. This point was corrected when I got around to writing
> the multi-pack-index since it uses "test-tool read-midx" instead of
> add.
>
> To fix this issue, I would probably go about it by removing the "read"
> subcommand and creating a "test-tool read-commit-graph" for the tests
> that need that output.
>
> If others on-list think that the better thing to do is to update the
> "read" subcommand to provide the same output, but iterate over each
> layer of an incremental commit-graph, then I can do that work instead.
In theory I suppose one could use it to debug a commit-graph file "in
the field" as it were, where somebody does not necessarily have the
test-tool programs. But in practice, I have not ever done that (I didn't
even know "commit-graph read" was there), and it's not that big a deal
to just have a build of git.git handy.
I'd be much more likely to use "commit-graph verify". And perhaps it
could grow a "--verbose" flag if somebody really wants that (but I think
it would be fine to punt until somebody cares enough to do so).
I guess dropping the sub-command is technically a backwards incompatible
change, but since it didn't do anything that normal users would find
useful in the first place, I wouldn't be sorry to see it go.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Split commit graphs and commit-graph read
2019-11-11 1:19 ` Derrick Stolee
2019-11-11 2:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-11 3:29 ` Jeff King
@ 2019-11-12 0:28 ` Bryan Turner
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bryan Turner @ 2019-11-12 0:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Derrick Stolee; +Cc: Git Users, peff@peff.net, gitster@pobox.com
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 5:19 PM Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But git commit-graph read isn't:
> > .../objects$ git commit-graph read
> > fatal: Could not open commit-graph
> > '/path/to/repository/objects/info/commit-graph': No such file or
> > directory
> >
> > Running some tests with commands like git for-each-ref and git
> > rev-list shows that the "split" commit graph is being used (setting
> > core.commitGraph=false makes commands noticeably slower), so
> > functionally all seems well. But should git commit-graph read be
> > handling this better?
>
> Unfortunately, you're running into an issue because I designed the
> "read" subcommand poorly (and also forgot to update it for
> incremental commit-graph files). The biggest issue is that "read"
> is not really meant for end-users. It really should have been built
> as a test-tool. This point was corrected when I got around to writing
> the multi-pack-index since it uses "test-tool read-midx" instead of
> add.
>
> To fix this issue, I would probably go about it by removing the "read"
> subcommand and creating a "test-tool read-commit-graph" for the tests
> that need that output.
>
> If others on-list think that the better thing to do is to update the
> "read" subcommand to provide the same output, but iterate over each
> layer of an incremental commit-graph, then I can do that work instead.
I was only running "git commit-graph read" as another way of verifying
that everything looked good (to Git, that is). I'd already run "git
commit-graph verify" and just found the discrepancy in their behavior
surprising/interesting. For what it's worth, I personally don't see
anything amiss with removing the "read" subcommand if that's simpler
than updating it to handle incremental graphs. (Put differently, it's
not a command I'd ever have Bitbucket Server run, or that I'm likely
to try and run going forward. In this case I just completed some
commit graph-related changes to Bitbucket Server and was looking for
every possible avenue I could pursue to try and ensure what I did was
producing the "correct" output after my changes got deployed to our
internal dogfooding server.)
Thanks for taking the time to look into it and clarify the behavior! I
really appreciate it.
Best regards,
Bryan Turner
>
> Thanks,
> -Stolee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-11-12 0:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-11-08 23:41 Split commit graphs and commit-graph read Bryan Turner
2019-11-11 1:19 ` Derrick Stolee
2019-11-11 2:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-11 3:29 ` Jeff King
2019-11-12 0:28 ` Bryan Turner
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).