From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: git pull & git gc Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:07:06 -0400 Message-ID: <20150318210706.GB3376@peff.net> References: <5509836D.2020304@aegee.org> <55098A49.1020003@aegee.org> <5509904A.2000606@aegee.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Duy Nguyen , Git Mailing List To: =?utf-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 18 22:07:15 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YYLBK-0007HG-FE for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 22:07:14 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932904AbbCRVHK convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:07:10 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:34849 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755401AbbCRVHJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:07:09 -0400 Received: (qmail 32674 invoked by uid 102); 18 Mar 2015 21:07:08 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 16:07:08 -0500 Received: (qmail 7024 invoked by uid 107); 18 Mar 2015 21:07:20 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:07:20 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:07:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5509904A.2000606@aegee.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 03:48:42PM +0100, =D0=94=D0=B8=D0=BB=D1=8F=D0=BD= =D0=9F=D0=B0=D0=BB=D0=B0=D1=83=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2 wrote: > #ls .git/objects/17/* | wc -l > 30 >=20 > 30 * 256 =3D 7 680 > 6 700 >=20 > And now? Do I have to run git gc --aggressive ? No, aggressive just controls the time we spend on repacking. If the guess is correct that the objects are kept because they are unreachable but "recent", then shortening the prune expiration time would get rid o= f them. E.g., "git gc --prune=3D1.hour.ago". That does not solve the underlying problem discussed elsewhere in the thread, but it would make this particular instance of it go away. :) -Peff