From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: fetching packs and storing them as packs Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 16:38:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20061027143854.GC20017@pasky.or.cz> References: <4540CA0C.6030300@tromer.org> <45413209.2000905@tromer.org> <20061027014229.GA28407@spearce.org> <45417205.6020805@tromer.org> <20061027030054.GB28407@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:43:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Shawn Pearce , Eran Tromer , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-message-flag: Outlook : A program to spread viri, but it can do mail too. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdSrj-00019F-V2 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 27 Oct 2006 16:39:24 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752229AbWJ0Oi5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:38:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752231AbWJ0Oi5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:38:57 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:64914 "EHLO machine.or.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752229AbWJ0Oi4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:38:56 -0400 Received: (qmail 14031 invoked by uid 2001); 27 Oct 2006 16:38:54 +0200 To: Nicolas Pitre Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Dear diary, on Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 04:27:05PM CEST, I got a letter where Nicolas Pitre said that... > On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Shawn Pearce wrote: > > OK so the repository won't get corrupted but the repack would be > > forced to abort. > > Maybe this is the best way out? Abort git-repack with "a fetch is in > progress -- retry later". No one will really suffer if the repack has > to wait for the next scheduled cron job, especially if the fetch doesn't > explode packs into loose objects anymore. I don't really like this that much. Big projects can have 10 commits per hour on average, and they also take potentially long time to repack, so you might get to never really repack them. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ #!/bin/perl -sp0777i