From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
Cc: Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 3/9] pack-objects: Allow --max-pack-size to be used together with --stdout
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 23:12:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vsjsfmawt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305495440-30836-4-git-send-email-johan@herland.net> (Johan Herland's message of "Sun, 15 May 2011 23:37:14 +0200")
Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> writes:
> Currently we refuse combining --max-pack-size with --stdout since there's
> no way to make multiple packs when the pack is written to stdout. However,
> we want to be able to limit the maximum size of the pack created by
> --stdout (and abort pack-objects if we are unable to meet that limit).
>
> Therefore, when used together with --stdout, we reinterpret --max-pack-size
> to indicate the maximum pack size which - if exceeded - will cause
> pack-objects to abort with an error message.
I only gave the code a cursory look, but I think your patch does more than
the above paragraphs say. I am not sure those extra change are justified.
For example,
> @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static unsigned long write_object(struct sha1file *f,
>
> if (!entry->delta)
> usable_delta = 0; /* no delta */
> - else if (!pack_size_limit)
> + else if (!pack_size_limit || pack_to_stdout)
> usable_delta = 1; /* unlimited packfile */
Why does this conditional have to change its behaviour when writing to the
standard output? I thought that the only thing you are doing "earlier we
didn't allow setting size limit when writing to standard output, now we
do", and I do not see the linkage between that objective and this change.
> @@ -2315,9 +2318,7 @@ int cmd_pack_objects(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>
> if (!pack_to_stdout && !pack_size_limit)
> pack_size_limit = pack_size_limit_cfg;
> - if (pack_to_stdout && pack_size_limit)
> - die("--max-pack-size cannot be used to build a pack for transfer.");
> - if (pack_size_limit && pack_size_limit < 1024*1024) {
> + if (!pack_to_stdout && pack_size_limit && pack_size_limit < 1024*1024) {
> warning("minimum pack size limit is 1 MiB");
> pack_size_limit = 1024*1024;
> }
Why is the new combination "writing to the standard output, but the
maximum size is limited" does not have the same lower bound to pack size
limit while on-disk packs do?
If you have a reason to believe 1 MiB is too large for a pack size limit,
shouldn't that logic apply equally to the on-disk case? What does this
change have to do with the interaction with --stdout option?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-16 6:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-13 16:54 [PATCH 2/2] receive-pack: Add receive.denyObjectLimit to refuse push with too many objects Johan Herland
2011-05-13 17:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-14 1:43 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-14 2:03 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] receive-pack: Add receive.objectCountLimit " Johan Herland
2011-05-14 2:30 ` Shawn Pearce
2011-05-14 13:17 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-14 22:17 ` Shawn Pearce
2011-05-15 17:42 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 0/9] Push limits Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 1/9] Update technical docs to reflect side-band-64k capability in receive-pack Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 2/9] send-pack: Attempt to retrieve remote status even if pack-objects fails Johan Herland
2011-05-16 4:07 ` Jeff King
2011-05-16 6:13 ` Jeff King
2011-05-16 6:39 ` Jeff King
2011-05-16 6:46 ` [PATCH 1/3] connect: treat generic proxy processes like ssh processes Jeff King
2011-05-16 19:57 ` Johannes Sixt
2011-05-16 23:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-17 5:54 ` Jeff King
2011-05-17 20:14 ` Johannes Sixt
2011-05-18 8:57 ` Jeff King
2011-05-16 6:52 ` [PATCH 2/3] connect: let callers know if connection is a socket Jeff King
2011-05-16 6:52 ` [PATCH 3/3] send-pack: avoid deadlock on git:// push with failed pack-objects Jeff King
2011-05-16 20:02 ` Johannes Sixt
2011-05-17 5:56 ` Jeff King
2011-05-18 20:24 ` [PATCH] Windows: add a wrapper for the shutdown() system call Johannes Sixt
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 3/9] pack-objects: Allow --max-pack-size to be used together with --stdout Johan Herland
2011-05-15 22:06 ` Shawn Pearce
2011-05-16 1:39 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-16 6:12 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2011-05-16 9:27 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 4/9] pack-objects: Teach new option --max-object-count, similar to --max-pack-size Johan Herland
2011-05-15 22:07 ` Shawn Pearce
2011-05-15 22:31 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-15 23:48 ` Shawn Pearce
2011-05-16 6:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-16 9:49 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 5/9] pack-objects: Teach new option --max-commit-count, limiting #commits in pack Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 6/9] receive-pack: Prepare for addition of the new 'limit-*' family of capabilities Johan Herland
2011-05-16 6:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-16 9:53 ` Johan Herland
2011-05-16 22:02 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2011-05-16 22:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-16 22:09 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2011-05-16 22:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-16 22:16 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 7/9] send-pack/receive-pack: Allow server to refuse pushes with too many objects Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 8/9] send-pack/receive-pack: Allow server to refuse pushing too large packs Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:37 ` [PATCHv3 9/9] send-pack/receive-pack: Allow server to refuse pushes with too many commits Johan Herland
2011-05-15 21:52 ` [PATCHv3 0/9] Push limits Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2011-05-14 17:50 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] receive-pack: Add receive.objectCountLimit to refuse push with too many objects Junio C Hamano
2011-05-14 22:27 ` Shawn Pearce
2011-05-13 18:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] receive-pack: Add receive.denyObjectLimit " Johannes Sixt
2011-05-14 1:49 ` Johan Herland
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=7vsjsfmawt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johan@herland.net \
--cc=spearce@spearce.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).