From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>
Cc: Keegan Carruthers-Smith <keegan.csmith@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: git archive generates tar with malformed pax extended attribute
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 07:55:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190530115554.GB31607@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24574d74-b6ca-6d36-759f-32cf26b36c3f@web.de>
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 07:54:44PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:
> Am 29.05.19 um 03:17 schrieb Jeff King:
> > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 01:34:32AM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:
> >> Parsing trees with symlinks twice is not ideal, but keeps the set
> >> structure simple -- a standard oidset suffices.
> >
> > If blobs comes after trees (and they usually do in a pack), you can do
> > it in a single pass by marking the blob as a symlink target, and then
> > when we actually see that blob's contents, marking it as either OK or
> > problematic. And then the finish() step just correlates those with the
> > tree.
>
> Good idea. Is that ordering guaranteed? (Stumbling about the "usually"
> in your first sentence.)
It's not guaranteed. Our implementation of pack-objects does order blobs
after trees, but I suspect this could be violated in rare cases with
some of the delta-island pack layering stuff.
I think it makes sense to be sure that the receiver is correct no matter
what, but optimize for this expected case (that's what I tried to do
with the .gitmodules checks).
> An ordering where dependent objects (like trees) follow the objects they
> reference would be better suited for these kinds of checks..
But worse for others (e.g., like .gitmodules where it's cheap to
identify a candidate blob, but the blob check is involved; there it's
much more optimal to see the tree first).
> > But here the problem is in the tree, not the blob. So we're not finding
> > suspect blobs, but rather re-checking each tree. And no matter what we
> > do (whether it's visiting the object again, or creating a set or mapping
> > with the object names) is going to be linear there. And a repository
> > with a symlink in the root tree is going to revisit or put in our
> > mapping every single root tree.
>
> That's true, potentially it needs remember and/or reprocess all trees,
> meaning this check may double the run time of fsck in the worst case.
> Example from the wild: The kernel repo currently has 36 symlinks and
> 6+ million objects are checked in total, and the symlink check processes
> 18943 trees_with_symlinks entries there.
That sounds about right. It's basically every version of every tree that
has a symlink. Did it make a noticeable difference in timing? Indexing
the whole kernel history is already a horribly slow process. :)
> > TBH, I'm not sure this fsck check was worth it even without the
> > implementation complexity.
>
> Hmm. git status reports such truncated symlinks as changed, so the
> issue *is* already detectable.
Hmm, yeah. That makes sense, since the filesystem (well, really the
syscall API layer) cannot represent the data we are feeding it.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-30 11:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-24 6:45 git archive generates tar with malformed pax extended attribute Keegan Carruthers-Smith
2019-05-24 7:06 ` Jeff King
2019-05-24 7:35 ` Keegan Carruthers-Smith
2019-05-24 8:13 ` Jeff King
2019-05-25 13:26 ` René Scharfe
2019-05-25 13:46 ` Andreas Schwab
2019-05-25 21:07 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-05-26 21:33 ` René Scharfe
2019-05-28 5:44 ` Jeff King
2019-05-28 5:58 ` Jeff King
2019-05-28 18:01 ` René Scharfe
2019-05-28 19:08 ` Jeff King
2019-05-28 23:34 ` René Scharfe
2019-05-29 1:17 ` Jeff King
2019-05-29 17:54 ` René Scharfe
2019-05-30 11:55 ` Jeff King [this message]
2019-06-02 16:58 ` René Scharfe
2019-06-04 20:53 ` Jeff King
2019-05-27 5:11 ` Keegan Carruthers-Smith
2019-05-25 20:46 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-05-25 21:19 ` brian m. carlson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190530115554.GB31607@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=keegan.csmith@gmail.com \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).