From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E731F5AE for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 17:47:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230417AbhFKRtl (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jun 2021 13:49:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42054 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229951AbhFKRtk (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jun 2021 13:49:40 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x82f.google.com (mail-qt1-x82f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45F6FC061574 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:47:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x82f.google.com with SMTP id t9so3208007qtw.7 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:47:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qDECNDGez8YkLLuQyGyEcVKFFBLrGWx/E0SqaFtmZag=; b=gDo2N/EEXZTLLQKbgQ0ao9rHTMDxW4bugHgRtfgqdLjIsWeOy2+GXjaxtdis2rmcUM HHxisEAeOxQ9a16QxOxac0BgdRk9kPlhLJAqP0uIK95ubriYXNX3LOr8Mr92M8ysugM3 l+ZNA8aZQNkQViirmt90YYEutQBk5n4w43tZycBc9brf/KMlIQlCAGrfYPTyrFnMzdLr p+VFjRnMqfFlBHRsSdmM1JvmPlRmGK0W6pk7Dc5cEEFS1QiD7L6LOvI1lacA3w6mAwuA XxA1IFImtTgwFEzk+UJLLp45xjh2SGqjYN59Qcq9RdOSYOLTIVaQvsCJ8Vf85fpq/CfD nG3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qDECNDGez8YkLLuQyGyEcVKFFBLrGWx/E0SqaFtmZag=; b=mKspEKFK7O2l9RoPim5Zna44uP23S4uKTsvnq2UGkDa2q8etC8pwvTp3XeShc6mjCj aYjjLGIlaqJft/VNuPFzuEbUD6OQyGXwMD6I1fCiEi9RAfnIM2CWpP61j6nt8BxrVn6F sUPI+V6JiC54MX2biUhIXJvM/uj73pueUKURBSmMXly/hmO4xRUUvUMja4SKxcZ+4sgq FoOtCfXTpYQljlsazYwo/0Kun+nKhucwvalCqbWa+2kYISZ9mmZ2OHJDB/OwUWhEe6jQ p2d9V8ekin/gYgZyE6TuRFqZum5yE+ZVINm0fWQ3m+ypiN3fKCwLzlYo2OmtsXf7xPPY sigw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iy+O9cVkw3wBRgciv3A5Xf6jmAajSDbpwrRhqReVcYZSaW582 NY4SQ5ydZR0WtD3+x+aj0c8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxx/rV4lr3DlBIhMfeJvKe55X1IRONzklACAKg7DkMCSuGeg6NXAwcOu0EWpltzbs/FjzKQcg== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5d55:: with SMTP id g21mr4928593qtx.101.1623433649261; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:47:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:1700:e72:80a0:3c70:274a:799:2c37? ([2600:1700:e72:80a0:3c70:274a:799:2c37]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i11sm4680924qtq.58.2021.06.11.10.47.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Making split commit graphs pick up new options (namely --changed-paths) To: Taylor Blau , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFy?= =?UTF-8?Q?mason?= Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com, gitster@pobox.com, peff@peff.net, szeder.dev@gmail.com References: <871r9a2dol.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87mtrx1cdr.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> From: Derrick Stolee Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 13:47:28 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 6/10/2021 8:50 PM, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 01:56:31AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> So yeah, maybe we can just unlink() them right away, or another way to >> handle the race is that load_commit_graph_chain() could just try again >> from the beginning in such a case, and presumably picking up the fresh >> just-rewritten chain. > > I'd probably be in favor of the latter. I want to point out that on Windows we cannot successfully unlink() a layer that is currently being read by another Git process. That will not affect server scenarios (to the best of my knowledge) but is important to many end users. Thanks, -Stolee