From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2E5FC433EF for ; Sat, 8 Jan 2022 01:14:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230151AbiAHBON (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2022 20:14:13 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48786 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230015AbiAHBOM (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Jan 2022 20:14:12 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x12a.google.com (mail-lf1-x12a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 545C1C061574 for ; Fri, 7 Jan 2022 17:14:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id i31so21439513lfv.10 for ; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 17:14:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DmTzwgnZ11uK2GjABkaxvnxbCMdmUy/yIkdHE6nCAUM=; b=dr3PCxUuTkMVoqx7tHPRAn/dcD/ScAeaMJPhTao6exVYEiaPmdjzOHZgWUlrM9cJdO AmE0hyaqDXzjHeyDzKDsH2WfLsH+6wdHQBKBpS6ByClqbCDIYcAP3pj52tjY9pYPsWnd SbnEFhGQvOVdux++V1IehXlGx5U0dpoQZlvX0dvgCBJi46KAWL38DLamigZrKo6IZlED 1ogHqy79/oIQRZD+VOumS0CDTmEjV10qXhJlRHACbdEdV7+2e7zWFmz/saITmZYRqN4A nR6eMittS3rqeH2aQPCK96LzsEgXKuNi/LHQKr1mJg+YG9tb8OTnHlYM17Vhk7Istju7 0pNw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DmTzwgnZ11uK2GjABkaxvnxbCMdmUy/yIkdHE6nCAUM=; b=hLpbyfYuOimx6kK08rbuX4SP5bchKHtrX977AOWCrHUIEhtrpr0pqg1JIIKTMMKVJB UU+CAFM3Ntdowost6X3PVr6SrP3WLvYlpbVRc/svI5BfQ1amRQJWLBdXBT44PeKuAfZd gQ60xYudRlOesoZJ9oW4qjN4Vug6s1XqJzJUe2vkvaIggnFJ3uniwIeN5nyehjtGufbE f0pWgx8RcWR9VpnnhE8JtXHAmnxV6BiFSgZ62dRqHOyIL09CMnolu5OQVNQvYAy+fHAJ QToKaDkw0HUtVcySdvx/VB9frTR+gXz2nf0AP7uISkGMrWoO7p8OF3ft3b4baM/QMCjW iq3w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533kEJy0EJCJMBy9XSWIjNgbbsN57nTny0SmigUVlYG8Qc+Grsv3 FW6cGM+H++2Icoe4FxsONWM/SrcqVLbOQgox/+9eHPNz1yo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw2hPs7reixFj1H5BhLQp7OljmSyW94SVYtT1N8dG+Q/JKH0HMBYC5H39q6vmmav4EyU1wgbBf2sLy7vTOIBjo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3196:: with SMTP id i22mr56593579lfe.241.1641604450415; Fri, 07 Jan 2022 17:14:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Neeraj Singh Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2022 17:13:59 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration To: "Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget" Cc: Git List , "Randall S. Becker" , Bagas Sanjaya , Elijah Newren , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= , Patrick Steinhardt , "Neeraj K. Singh" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hello Everyone, I wanted to revive this thread in the new year. To summarize the current state of affairs: * The current fsync patch series implements two new configuration options: core.fsync =3D -- select which repo components will be fsynced core.fsyncMethod =3D fsync|writeout-only -- select what form of fsyncing will be done * This patch series now ignores core.fsyncObjectFiles with a deprecation warning pointing the user at core.fsync. * There is a follow-on series that will extend the core.fsyncMethod to also include a `batch` mode that speeds up bulk operations by avoiding repeated disk cache flushes. * I developed the current mechanism after =C3=86var pointed out that the original `core.fsyncObjectFiles=3Dbatch` change would cause older versions of Git to die() when exposed to a new configuration. There were also several fsync changes floating around, including Patrick Steinhardts `core.fsyncRefFiles` change [1] and Eric Wong's `core.fsync =3D false` change [2]. * The biggest sticking points are in [3]. The fundamental disagreement is about whether core.fsync should look like: A) core.fsync =3D objects,commit-graph [current patch implementatio= n] or B) core.fsync =3D objects core.fsync =3D commit-graph [=C3=86var's multivalued proposal]= . I prefer sticking with (A) for reasons spelled out in the thread. I'm happy to re-litigate this discussion though. * There's also a sticking point about whether we should fsync when invoking pack-objects against stdout. I think that mostly reflects a missing comment in the code rather than a real disagreement. * Now that ew/test-wo-fsync has been integrated, there's some redundancy between core.fsync=3Dnone and Eric's patch. Open questions: 1) What format should we use for the core.fsync configuration to select individual repo components to sync? 2) Are we okay with deprecating core.fsyncObjectFiles in a single release with a warning? 3) Is it reasonable to expect people adding new persistent files to add and document new values of the core.fsync settings? Thanks, Neeraj [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20211030103950.M489266@dcvr/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20211028002102.19384-1-e@80x24.org/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/git/211207.86wnkgo9fv.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com= /