From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] builtin/repack.c: implement support for `--cruft-max-size`
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2023 13:21:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPsDyKOa76Mxb9u-@tanuki> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7e4e42e1aacf2111f04a933c0725a8c81769f8d6.1694123506.git.me@ttaylorr.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6905 bytes --]
On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 05:52:04PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
[snip]
> @@ -125,17 +133,39 @@ static void mark_packs_for_deletion_1(struct string_list *names,
> if (len < hexsz)
> continue;
> sha1 = item->string + len - hexsz;
> - /*
> - * Mark this pack for deletion, which ensures that this
> - * pack won't be included in a MIDX (if `--write-midx`
> - * was given) and that we will actually delete this pack
> - * (if `-d` was given).
> - */
> - if (!string_list_has_string(names, sha1))
> - item->util = (void*)1;
> +
> + if (pack_is_retained(item)) {
> + item->util = NULL;
> + } else if (!string_list_has_string(names, sha1)) {
> + /*
> + * Mark this pack for deletion, which ensures
> + * that this pack won't be included in a MIDX
> + * (if `--write-midx` was given) and that we
> + * will actually delete this pack (if `-d` was
> + * given).
> + */
> + item->util = DELETE_PACK;
> + }
I find the behaviour of this function a tad surprising as it doesn't
only mark a pack for deletion, but it also marks a pack as not being
retained anymore. Shouldn't we rather:
if (pack_is_retained(item)) {
// Theoretically speaking we shouldn't even do this bit here as
// we _un_mark the pack for deletion. But at least we shouldn't
// be removing the `RETAIN_PACK` bit, I'd think.
item->util &= ~DELETE_PACK;
} else if (!string_list_has_string(names, sha1)) {
// And here we shouldn't discard the `RETAIN_PACK` bit either.
item->util |= DELETE_PACK;
}
> }
> }
>
> +static void retain_cruft_pack(struct existing_packs *existing,
> + struct packed_git *cruft)
> +{
> + struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> + struct string_list_item *item;
> +
> + strbuf_addstr(&buf, pack_basename(cruft));
> + strbuf_strip_suffix(&buf, ".pack");
> +
> + item = string_list_lookup(&existing->cruft_packs, buf.buf);
> + if (!item)
> + BUG("could not find cruft pack '%s'", pack_basename(cruft));
> +
> + item->util = (void*)RETAIN_PACK;
> + strbuf_release(&buf);
> +}
> +
Similarly, should we handle potentially pre-existing bits gracefully and
`item->util |= RETAIN_PACK`?
> static void mark_packs_for_deletion(struct existing_packs *existing,
> struct string_list *names)
>
> @@ -217,6 +247,8 @@ static void collect_pack_filenames(struct existing_packs *existing,
> }
>
> string_list_sort(&existing->kept_packs);
> + string_list_sort(&existing->non_kept_packs);
> + string_list_sort(&existing->cruft_packs);
> strbuf_release(&buf);
> }
>
> @@ -799,6 +831,72 @@ static void remove_redundant_bitmaps(struct string_list *include,
> strbuf_release(&path);
> }
>
> +static int existing_cruft_pack_cmp(const void *va, const void *vb)
> +{
> + struct packed_git *a = *(struct packed_git **)va;
> + struct packed_git *b = *(struct packed_git **)vb;
> +
> + if (a->pack_size < b->pack_size)
> + return -1;
> + if (a->pack_size > b->pack_size)
> + return 1;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void collapse_small_cruft_packs(FILE *in, unsigned long max_size,
We might want to use `size_t` to denote file sizes instead of `unsigned
long`.
> + struct existing_packs *existing)
> +{
> + struct packed_git **existing_cruft, *p;
> + struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> + unsigned long total_size = 0;
Here, as well.
> + size_t existing_cruft_nr = 0;
> + size_t i;
> +
> + ALLOC_ARRAY(existing_cruft, existing->cruft_packs.nr);
> +
> + for (p = get_all_packs(the_repository); p; p = p->next) {
> + if (!(p->is_cruft && p->pack_local))
> + continue;
> +
> + strbuf_reset(&buf);
> + strbuf_addstr(&buf, pack_basename(p));
> + strbuf_strip_suffix(&buf, ".pack");
> +
> + if (!string_list_has_string(&existing->cruft_packs, buf.buf))
> + continue;
> +
> + if (existing_cruft_nr >= existing->cruft_packs.nr)
> + BUG("too many cruft packs (found %"PRIuMAX", but knew "
> + "of %"PRIuMAX")",
> + (uintmax_t)existing_cruft_nr + 1,
> + (uintmax_t)existing->cruft_packs.nr);
> + existing_cruft[existing_cruft_nr++] = p;
> + }
> +
> + QSORT(existing_cruft, existing_cruft_nr, existing_cruft_pack_cmp);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < existing_cruft_nr; i++) {
> + off_t proposed;
This should also be `size_t` given that `st_add` returns `size_t` and
not `off_t`.
> + p = existing_cruft[i];
> + proposed = st_add(total_size, p->pack_size);
> +
> + if (proposed <= max_size) {
> + total_size = proposed;
> + fprintf(in, "-%s\n", pack_basename(p));
> + } else {
> + retain_cruft_pack(existing, p);
> + fprintf(in, "%s\n", pack_basename(p));
> + }
It's a bit funny that we re-check whether we have exceeded the maximum
size in subsequente iterations once we hit the limit, but it arguably
makes the logic a bit simpler.
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < existing->non_kept_packs.nr; i++)
> + fprintf(in, "-%s.pack\n",
> + existing->non_kept_packs.items[i].string);
> +
> + strbuf_release(&buf);
> +}
> +
> static int write_cruft_pack(const struct pack_objects_args *args,
> const char *destination,
> const char *pack_prefix,
> @@ -846,10 +944,18 @@ static int write_cruft_pack(const struct pack_objects_args *args,
> in = xfdopen(cmd.in, "w");
> for_each_string_list_item(item, names)
> fprintf(in, "%s-%s.pack\n", pack_prefix, item->string);
> - for_each_string_list_item(item, &existing->non_kept_packs)
> - fprintf(in, "-%s.pack\n", item->string);
> - for_each_string_list_item(item, &existing->cruft_packs)
> - fprintf(in, "-%s.pack\n", item->string);
> + if (args->max_pack_size && !cruft_expiration) {
> + unsigned long max_pack_size;
> + if (!git_parse_ulong(args->max_pack_size, &max_pack_size))
> + return error(_("could not parse --cruft-max-size: '%s'"),
> + args->max_pack_size);
> + collapse_small_cruft_packs(in, max_pack_size, existing);
> + } else {
> + for_each_string_list_item(item, &existing->non_kept_packs)
> + fprintf(in, "-%s.pack\n", item->string);
> + for_each_string_list_item(item, &existing->cruft_packs)
> + fprintf(in, "-%s.pack\n", item->string);
> + }
If I understand correctly, we only collapse small cruft packs in case
we're not expiring any objects at the same time. Is there an inherent
reason why? I would imagine that it can indeed be useful to expire
objects contained in cruft packs and then have git-repack(1) recombine
whatever is left into larger packs.
If the reason is basically "it's complicated" then that is fine with me,
we can still implement the functionality at a later point in time. But
until then I think that we should let callers know that the two options
are incompatible with each other by producing an error when both are
passed.
Patrick
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-08 11:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-07 21:51 [PATCH 0/2] repack: implement `--cruft-max-size` Taylor Blau
2023-09-07 21:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] t7700: split cruft-related tests to t7704 Taylor Blau
2023-09-08 0:01 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-09-07 21:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] builtin/repack.c: implement support for `--cruft-max-size` Taylor Blau
2023-09-07 23:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-25 18:01 ` Taylor Blau
2023-09-08 11:21 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2023-10-02 20:30 ` Taylor Blau
2023-10-03 0:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] repack: implement `--cruft-max-size` Taylor Blau
2023-10-03 0:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] t7700: split cruft-related tests to t7704 Taylor Blau
2023-10-03 0:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] builtin/repack.c: parse `--max-pack-size` with OPT_MAGNITUDE Taylor Blau
2023-10-05 11:31 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-10-05 17:28 ` Taylor Blau
2023-10-05 20:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-03 0:44 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] builtin/repack.c: implement support for `--max-cruft-size` Taylor Blau
2023-10-05 12:08 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-10-05 17:35 ` Taylor Blau
2023-10-05 20:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-07 17:20 ` [PATCH] repack: free existing_cruft array after use Jeff King
2023-10-09 1:24 ` Taylor Blau
2023-10-09 17:28 ` Junio C Hamano
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=ZPsDyKOa76Mxb9u-@tanuki \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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).