From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: [PATCH] change the unpack limit threshold to a saner value Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:19:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <7vejrcy860.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 00:19:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org In-reply-to: <7vejrcy860.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-X-Sender: nico@xanadu.home Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Gs6zK-00016S-9w for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 07 Dec 2006 01:19:46 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937829AbWLGATn (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:19:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S937830AbWLGATm (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:19:42 -0500 Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:59510 "EHLO relais.videotron.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S937829AbWLGATm (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:19:42 -0500 Received: from xanadu.home ([74.56.106.175]) by VL-MO-MR003.ip.videotron.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-2.05 (built Apr 28 2005)) with ESMTP id <0J9V00667NKTM040@VL-MO-MR003.ip.videotron.ca> for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:19:41 -0500 (EST) To: Junio C Hamano Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Nicolas Pitre writes: > > > Let's assume the average object size is x. Given n objects, the needed > > storage size is n*(x + b), where b is the average wasted block size on > > disk. > > ... > > This is why I think the current default treshold should be 3 instead of > > the insane value of 5000. But since it feels a bit odd to go from 5000 > > to 3 I setled on 10. > > I see you are optimizing for disk footprint, and this will > result in tons of tiny packs left between "repack -a". Depends how often i.e. how big pushes are, and how often you repack. > I have not benched it yet, but the runtime pack handling code > was written assuming we have only a handful of big packs; I > suspect this change would affect the performance at runtime in > quite a bad way. Possibly. Still a treshold of 5000 is way too large IMHO.