From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: pack count on repo.or.cz [was "Medium term dreams"] Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 03:04:10 +0200 Message-ID: <20080902010410.GI10360@machine.or.cz> References: <7vsksjsbcc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080902000037.GA11869@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 02 03:05:56 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KaKL5-0006zY-Lc for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 03:05:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753426AbYIBBEU (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:04:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753415AbYIBBET (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:04:19 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:51498 "EHLO machine.or.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753375AbYIBBES (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:04:18 -0400 Received: by machine.or.cz (Postfix, from userid 2001) id AF6E63939B3B; Tue, 2 Sep 2008 03:04:10 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080902000037.GA11869@coredump.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 08:00:37PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > It looks like the gc.autopacklimit defaults to 50, which would have > helped this. Pasky, is repo.or.cz not gc-ing? Or gc-ing with different > parameters? Or is this an artifact of the forking infrastructure (i.e., > these packs are actually split across multiple modules)? Unfortunately, I'm not aware how to decreate the packs count with current Git without losing _any_ objects. So yes, you could say that this is an artifact of the forking infrastructure - we just can't afford to lose objects. I've been meaning to look into this for few... years now, but there is always too many more important things to do. If anyone wants to help out, you're welcome to! :-) Maybe I should just give up on the whole alternates idea. Unless the referenced object store is practically static, it just does not seem as a feasible thing to do with Git at all, and disk space is cheap. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis The next generation of interesting software will be done on the Macintosh, not the IBM PC. -- Bill Gates