From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: git-cvsexportcommit fails for huge commits Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:45:54 -0500 Message-ID: <20071214044554.GB10169@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20071211200418.GA13815@mkl-desktop> <20071212083154.GB7676@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vir348e0l.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20071212092512.GB20799@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vzlwevu2k.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Markus Klinik , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 14 05:46:28 2007 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 1J32RP-0007Il-My for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:46:28 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762572AbXLNEp6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:45:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762466AbXLNEp6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:45:58 -0500 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:1843 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762331AbXLNEp5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:45:57 -0500 Received: (qmail 19993 invoked by uid 111); 14 Dec 2007 04:45:55 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:45:55 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:45:54 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vzlwevu2k.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 07:22:43PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Sorry, you are right. > > Perhaps pick a reasonably small but not insanely small value, like 16kB, > forget about the atomicity issues for now, as an interim improvement > patch? I'm fine with that. We can probably go a bit higher than that. From my limited testing[1]: Linux 2.6.18: ~128K Linux 2.6.23: huge? I tried ~350K and it worked fine Solaris: huge? I tried ~350K and it worked fine Freebsd 6.1: ~256K So it seems that we could probably go with something more like 64K, and then only truly pathological cases should trigger the behavior. -Peff [1] All numbers are approximate and determined experimentally with something like: for i in `seq 1 $n`; do touch $long_filename-$i done ls * | wc