From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: protect against disappearing packs Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:02:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20111014130247.GA7808@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20111014012320.GA4395@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, git-dev@github.com, "Shawn O. Pearce" To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 14 15:02:57 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1REhPd-0005GH-5f for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:02:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756553Ab1JNNCw (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:02:52 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:60512 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756515Ab1JNNCw (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:02:52 -0400 Received: (qmail 8708 invoked by uid 107); 14 Oct 2011 13:02:55 -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/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:02:55 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:02:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:42:28PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > --- > > you should put your SOB above that line I would think. Thanks. I cheated and wrote my "---" cover letter in the commit message locally, knowing that it would get included by format-patch but stripped by am on Junio's end. Which does work, except that "format-patch -s" puts the SOB in the wrong place. :) > Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre Thanks for reviewing. > > We're seeing this at GitHub because we prune pretty > > aggressively. We let pushes go into individual repositories, > > but then we kick off a job to move the resulting objects > > into the repository's "network" repo, which is basically a > > big alternates repository for related repos. > > While this patch certainly has value, it doesn't provide 100% > reliability for that use case. Maybe the github infrastructure should > simply skip any auto-repack on push if some other object maintenance > operation is ongoing, possibly via the pre-auto-gc hook. I'm not sure I understand the problem. We already serialize the re-packing jobs in a queue, so you won't have two repacks going at once. The problematic pack-objects is the one started by upload-pack when somebody fetches. Or do you mean turning off receive.autogc? I'd have to check if we do that, but we definitely should; it's useless to us (though it would be unlikely to trigger anyway, because we are manually repacking so frequently). -Peff