From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sitaram Chamarty Subject: does a successful 'git gc' imply 'git fsck' Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 08:01:49 +0530 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 To: Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Dec 02 03:32:07 2012 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 1TezLi-0003AK-Ln for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2012 03:32:06 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751808Ab2LBCbv (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2012 21:31:51 -0500 Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:43573 "EHLO mail-ee0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751573Ab2LBCbv (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Dec 2012 21:31:51 -0500 Received: by mail-ee0-f46.google.com with SMTP id e53so982466eek.19 for ; Sat, 01 Dec 2012 18:31:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=keQUl5xVZURz8pOkzgJf2BSC5XV+8onJtGQmUxvMn3A=; b=jPByHxvTXCmymUrNfBVcutInYtwmlgY5Rab451XAEF/o2WpYzz5+sG8fpCMe01BmKC kijXtl8xHoM05uh9KWR0Ging1fyUeLeqHBFdtEIQ1214EEeUI2nW7f/3vvvxoXeuPBD+ rW0ogKVHRG8phxHDDSiicmNgLCFQu3JfdYCpUjyHRKocgmVcSuQOy4oidyMFDmuSOcD8 nqikNuJO0V++1RpsJvcltB7gVzdm82nOZ/DIiIPAeZDCK59ZLnlsVHnB+wBEjW2IjTBa iwPItgEs3pBdO6XlEIIWaUhwG9XqO5YICU4EYLS5lPYRgl+duPN0fMx1X7+X4qhtTW33 izkA== Received: by 10.14.215.197 with SMTP id e45mr21764059eep.0.1354415509854; Sat, 01 Dec 2012 18:31:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.157.79 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Dec 2012 18:31:49 -0800 (PST) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, Background: I have a situation where I have to fix up a few hundred repos in terms of 'git gc' (the auto gc seems to have failed in many cases; they have far more than 6700 loose objects). I also found some corrupted objects in some cases that prevent the gc from completing. I am running "git gc" followed by "git fsck". The majority of the repos I have worked through so far appear to be fine, but in the larger repos (upwards of 2-3 GB) the git fsck is taking almost 5 times longer than the 'gc'. If I could assume that a successful 'git gc' means an fsck is not needed, I'd save a lot of time. Hence my question. -- Sitaram