From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
Cc: Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix background maintenance regression in Git 2.45.0
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 08:13:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq34o5l8j7.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <81c7bd02-0c2d-452f-800e-ca0d3853a941@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Fri, 19 Jul 2024 09:24:55 -0400")
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".
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-19 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-18 19:55 [PATCH 0/2] Fix background maintenance regression in Git 2.45.0 Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-07-18 19:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] t5319: add failing test case for repack/expire Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-07-18 19:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] midx-write: revert use of --stdin-packs Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-07-18 21:57 ` [PATCH 0/2] Fix background maintenance regression in Git 2.45.0 Junio C Hamano
2024-07-18 22:38 ` Taylor Blau
2024-07-19 13:23 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-07-19 13:24 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-07-19 15:13 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2024-07-19 16:20 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-07-18 22:50 ` Taylor Blau
2024-07-19 13:21 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-07-19 13:38 ` Taylor Blau
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq34o5l8j7.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=stolee@gmail.com \
/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.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.