From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] gc/repack: release packs when needed
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 09:24:08 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqlg3ryuo7.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190111161021.GE16754@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 11 Jan 2019 11:10:22 -0500")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 01:01:36PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
>> > index 871a56f1c5..df90fd7f51 100644
>> > --- a/builtin/gc.c
>> > +++ b/builtin/gc.c
>> > @@ -659,8 +659,10 @@ int cmd_gc(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> >
>> > report_garbage = report_pack_garbage;
>> > reprepare_packed_git(the_repository);
>> > - if (pack_garbage.nr > 0)
>> > + if (pack_garbage.nr > 0) {
>> > + close_all_packs(the_repository->objects);
>> > clean_pack_garbage();
>> > + }
>>
>> Closing before removing does make sense, but wouldn't we want to
>> move reprepare_packed_git() after clean_pack_garbage() while at it?
>> After all, the logical sequence is that we used the current set of
>> packs to figure out whihch ones are garbage, then now we are about
>> to discard. We close the packs in the current set (i.e. the fix
>> made in this patch), discard the garbage packs. It would make sense
>> to start using the new set (i.e. "reprepare") after all that is
>> done, no? Especially, given that the next step (write-commit-graph)
>> still wants to read quite a lot of data from now the latest set of
>> packfiles...
>
> I agree that your suggested ordering makes more sense, but I don't think
> it matters in practice with the current code. reprepare_packed_git()
> never throws away old pack entries (and if they're mmap'd, we might even
> continue to use them). So the end result is the same either way.
Yeah, it would not make difference to the machine. I was trying to
be more helpful to human readers.
In any case, this patch from Dec 15 last year is where my backlog
sweeping is at right now X-<.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-11 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-15 22:04 [PATCH 0/1] gc/repack: release packs when needed Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-12-15 22:04 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-01-10 21:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-01-11 16:10 ` Jeff King
2019-01-11 17:24 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
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=xmqqlg3ryuo7.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--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).