From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "George Spelvin" Subject: Re: git auto-repack is broken... Date: 3 Dec 2011 01:55:19 -0500 Message-ID: <20111203065519.22213.qmail@science.horizon.com> Cc: linux@horizon.com, peff@peff.net To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Dec 03 08:02:09 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 1RWjbs-0001Sh-RE for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 08:02:09 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751811Ab1LCHCD (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2011 02:02:03 -0500 Received: from science.horizon.com ([71.41.210.146]:58735 "HELO science.horizon.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751734Ab1LCHCB (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2011 02:02:01 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 399 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:02:01 EST Received: (qmail 22214 invoked by uid 1000); 3 Dec 2011 01:55:19 -0500 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Thanks, Jeff, for the life-cycle chart. A couple of ideas come to mind: - When unpacking objects from a pack, it should be fine to set their date to that of the pack. After all, they're at least that old. - We could put unreferenced objects into packs whose date is the most recent of any of the contained objects. - We could then group unreferenced objects into packs based on age, so their ages sould not be affected too much by the preceding operations. That still produces a noticeable number of packs, which isn't good, but maybe it's better that keeping thousands of loose objects for a month...