Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix background maintenance regression in Git 2.45.0

[Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>]

On 7/19/24 11:13 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On 7/18/24 5:57 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> "Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Here is an issue I noticed while exploring issues with my local copy of a
>>>> large monorepo. I was intending to show some engineers how nice the objects
>>>> were maintained by background maintenance, but saw hundreds of small
>>>> pack-files that were up to two months old. This time matched when I upgraded
>>>> to the microsoft/git fork that included the 2.45.0 release of Git.
>>> I almost said "wow, perfect timing on the -rc1 day", but then
>>> realized that this is not a regression during _this_ cycle, but a
>>> cycle ago.
>>
>> I almost waited until after the release, but I wanted to put the
>> information out there just in case you were interested in taking it
>> into 2.46.0 or were planning on a 2.45.3.
> 
> Yup, thanks but this is not exactly a repository breaking data
> corruption bug, and did not look ultra urgent.  Especially if we
> want to pursue a solution that helps both expiring stale packs
> better (which is what you are restoring) and making better delta
> chain selection (which may be what you are losing) at the same time,
> such a change could become a source of data corruption bug, so I'd
> prefer to see it started early in a cycle, rather as a last-minute
> "let's fix this too".

I agree with this assessment. The microsoft/git fork has taken the
revert as users of that fork have a higher chance of being affected.

Thanks,
-Stolee