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=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,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: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] change the unpack limit treshold to a saner value Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:39:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 03:39:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org In-Reply-To: X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.162 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 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 1GsA6r-00033f-P1 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 07 Dec 2006 04:39:46 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968059AbWLGDjn (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 22:39:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S968104AbWLGDjn (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 22:39:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.25]:43271 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S968059AbWLGDjm (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 22:39:42 -0500 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id kB73daID021278 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:39:36 -0800 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id kB73dZDh027608; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 19:39:35 -0800 To: Nicolas Pitre Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > Note that this setting is currently observed for pushes not pulls. > On the pull side you currentli need to provide -k for not exploding > packs. So noted. > So the question is what number of objects on average do pushes have? If > most pushes are below the treshold this is not going to be really > useful. It will depend a lot on the project, and "where" in the project you are. For example, for most end developers, the "push" is likely going to be a few commits (say, a days work). Probably on the order of a few tens to maybe a few hundred objects. It's actually hard to create a pack with less than ten objects if you have a few directory levels (a single small commit in the kernel is usually 5-7 objects: commit + 2-3 levels of directory + a couple of blobs). For me, as I pull a big merge and push it out, a push can easily be in the thousands of objects, just because I merged other peoples combined work over several weeks. And for a "mirror" server, it will depend on the granularity of the mirroring. > And I think 5000 is definitely way too high. 10 might be too small > indeed. 100 is maybe a good default to try out. I think 100 is a nice round number for humans. Worth trying.