From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Beller Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Fix atomicity and avoid fd exhaustion in ref transactions Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 10:32:32 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1431225937-10456-1-git-send-email-mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Michael Haggerty , Jeff King , Eric Sunshine , "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 11 19:32:39 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YrrZG-0001Ei-UC for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 19:32:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751403AbbEKRce (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2015 13:32:34 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f180.google.com ([209.85.223.180]:35849 "EHLO mail-ie0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751102AbbEKRcd (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2015 13:32:33 -0400 Received: by iecmd7 with SMTP id md7so36363427iec.3 for ; Mon, 11 May 2015 10:32:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=1s7wQu9kdAekgmsB0qSAX++09jrV2O+VpluDFxALVTw=; b=JWb6pgu5kc2iGdjRHwjpUWvqpf6jEGzYya8DuyxjTv+7lkJr4/OCpj8M+12KhUZa4Z ufCWhdu429aeKBAgBEuA6wftAVzYp/2IKTIIhWrJ9cizvh7ZPxVv5V+9FX8sDvMBi7kw DWqyBihPl+G1J2zde590qvkCYJXqE2/i7MbJ52y6Wr2kWFYBADHTYpjddMuG5+dabOUh 4gr3Pzb04KDHiJ/fDVuCA01njKNKcc+APXHQUpw5qnykqa+z4/xOIF1FGXPei7UAdoQy FVi+sFLpsE4dkq88+5ki37EdD+SZpvu/5vyD3jemhSQWugVSbr4wX0M0Xf1UgLx2DppO MZwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1s7wQu9kdAekgmsB0qSAX++09jrV2O+VpluDFxALVTw=; b=cTDuji0BeKrYTl4k+9aZGVr2H5ii+lA439E+Lghxz+nHHS95dMdqguTVqPYzf70f+v FqC83SJefSK63hfONYDuUbC3tgkh6TOkGT1PiXfjcI5YtprXJZxjvtvO/AkviPAkW04I 5wdA6u8vfxNfc5fsuYqZWY4gO1Pxq10D2JRqWZwiLmqmFACjN93kQEu9ipl53zj0jBaU bTvxEOhUZwC5UrnH5s3p8k1ZE9CP6Vt9GmbYd8HKxJm10u2j/czojNtmIbKQ0B7N1QST rQqq5fupuJ1jZgrVtQIPkYF/oexL+rwNaEeNpehCY5gVP0efQzEYFuTQVCoPUkz2shO1 mZ7A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlcQMrn4cvvzYL52mlr23M/DOFaoJJzqrohSmlMY7+1iZr08VDQVb8WL8ENFxKczdetCH08 X-Received: by 10.42.20.14 with SMTP id e14mr12372069icb.76.1431365552917; Mon, 11 May 2015 10:32:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.107.46.22 with HTTP; Mon, 11 May 2015 10:32:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Michael Haggerty writes: > >> The following other branches, also from my GitHub repo, might be >> useful: >> >> * 'write-refs-sooner-2.3' -- suggested merge of the change to 'maint'. >> >> * 'write-refs-sooner-master' -- suggested merge of the change to >> 'master'. >> >> * 'write-refs-sooner-rebased-2.3' and >> 'write-refs-sooner-rebased-master' -- rebases of 'write-refs-sooner' >> onto 'maint' and 'master' respectively, in case anybody is >> interested to see how the individual patches would look if >> implemented natively on these branches. > > Thanks, that indeed is very helpful and instructive. > > A mechanical merge of sooner-2.2 to maint trivially gave sooner-2.3, > so I am happy with that one. > > Even though I manually resolved it and the resulting tree pretty > much matched with your suggested merge, I am hesitant to record the > change of sooner-2.3 as a single large merge to master. I am > tempted to record this as somewhat a wicked merge, e.g. > > - apply posted patches on maint-2.2, which is your sooner-2.2; > > - branch sooner-2.3 from maint, merge sooner-2.2; > > - branch sooner-master from v2.4.0, apply the patches in your > sooner-rebased-master on top, and then merge sooner-2.3, possibly > with "-s ours" > > And then sooner-master would record both "if built naturally on 2.4" > progression, which would explain what was done much better than a > huge merge of sooner-2.3 into 'master', and "what is to be done on > older codebase". > > I dunno. > > Anyway, these patches looked good both on 2.2 and on 2.4. Thanks. The patches from Michael all look good. The one he picked up from me has a weird commit message, though. Thanks, Stefan