From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] maintenance: add checking logic in `pack_refs_condition()`
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 15:00:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aQi1e0zWfRaxSKtz@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251031-562-add-sub-command-to-check-if-maintenance-is-needed-v1-4-a03d53e28d0e@gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 03:22:24PM +0100, Karthik Nayak wrote:
> The 'git-maintenance(1)' command support an '--auto' flag. Usage of the
s/support/&s/
> flag ensures to run maintenance tasks only if certain thresholds are
> met. The heuristic is defined on a task level, wherein each task defines
> a 'auto_condition', which states if the task should be run.
s/a/an/
> The 'pack-refs' task is hard-coded to return 1 as:
> 1. There was never a way to check if the reference backend needs to be
> optimized without actually performing the optimization.
> 2. We can pass in the '--auto' flag to 'git-pack-refs(1)' which would
> optimize based on heuristics.
>
> The previous commit added a `refs_optimize_required()` function, which
> can be used to check if a reference backend required optimization. Use
> this within `pack_refs_condition()`.
>
> This allows us to add a 'git maintenance is-needed' subcommand which can
> notify the user if maintenance is needed without actually performing the
> optimization, without this change, the reference backend would always
s/optimize, without/optimize. Without/
> state that optimization is needed.
>
> Since we import 'revision.h', we need to remove the definition for
> 'SEEN' which is duplicated in the included header.
Quite weird that it was redefined in the first place. Feels like a nice
side effect.
> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
> index c6d62c74a7..72177305ff 100644
> --- a/builtin/gc.c
> +++ b/builtin/gc.c
> @@ -285,12 +286,26 @@ static void maintenance_run_opts_release(struct maintenance_run_opts *opts)
>
> static int pack_refs_condition(UNUSED struct gc_config *cfg)
> {
> - /*
> - * The auto-repacking logic for refs is handled by the ref backends and
> - * exposed via `git pack-refs --auto`. We thus always return truish
> - * here and let the backend decide for us.
> - */
> - return 1;
> + struct string_list included_refs = STRING_LIST_INIT_NODUP;
> + struct ref_exclusions excludes = REF_EXCLUSIONS_INIT;
> + struct refs_optimize_opts optimize_opts = {
> + .exclusions = &excludes,
> + .includes = &included_refs,
A bit weird that we have to declare these two fields even though we
don't really care for either of them. But I don't mind that too much.
> + .flags = REFS_OPTIMIZE_PRUNE | REFS_OPTIMIZE_AUTO,
> + };
> + bool required;
> +
> + // Check for all refs, similar to 'git refs optimize --all'.
Style: this should use `/* */` comments.
> + string_list_append(optimize_opts.includes, "*");
> +
> + if (refs_optimize_required(get_main_ref_store(the_repository),
> + &optimize_opts, &required))
> + return 0;
> +
> + clear_ref_exclusions(&excludes);
> + string_list_clear(&included_refs, 0);
> +
> + return required;
You return a boolean, but the function is declared to return an integer.
This works, but it feels wrong.
Patrick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-03 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-31 14:22 [PATCH 0/5] maintenance: add an 'is-needed' subcommand Karthik Nayak
2025-10-31 14:22 ` [PATCH 1/5] reftable/stack: return stack segments directly Karthik Nayak
2025-10-31 16:22 ` Justin Tobler
2025-11-03 15:05 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-03 18:03 ` Justin Tobler
2025-10-31 14:22 ` [PATCH 2/5] reftable/stack: add function to check if optimization is required Karthik Nayak
2025-10-31 17:02 ` Justin Tobler
2025-10-31 18:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-03 16:20 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-03 15:51 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-03 17:59 ` Justin Tobler
2025-11-03 14:00 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-03 16:35 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-10-31 14:22 ` [PATCH 3/5] refs: add a `optimize_required` field to `struct ref_storage_be` Karthik Nayak
2025-10-31 14:22 ` [PATCH 4/5] maintenance: add checking logic in `pack_refs_condition()` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-03 14:00 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2025-11-03 17:04 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-10-31 14:22 ` [PATCH 5/5] maintenance: add 'is-needed' subcommand Karthik Nayak
2025-11-03 14:00 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-03 17:18 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 5:54 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-04 8:28 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 8:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] maintenance: add an " Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 8:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] reftable/stack: return stack segments directly Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 8:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] reftable/stack: add function to check if optimization is required Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 20:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-05 14:11 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-05 18:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-06 8:18 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 8:43 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] refs: add a `optimize_required` field to `struct ref_storage_be` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 8:43 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] maintenance: add checking logic in `pack_refs_condition()` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 8:44 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] maintenance: add 'is-needed' subcommand Karthik Nayak
2025-11-04 15:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] maintenance: add an " Junio C Hamano
2025-11-05 14:00 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v3 " Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] reftable/stack: return stack segments directly Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] reftable/stack: add function to check if optimization is required Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 18:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-07 6:06 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] refs: add a `optimize_required` field to `struct ref_storage_be` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] maintenance: add checking logic in `pack_refs_condition()` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 11:58 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-06 13:04 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 15:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-07 15:58 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-07 16:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-07 15:58 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 8:22 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] maintenance: add 'is-needed' subcommand Karthik Nayak
2025-11-06 12:02 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-06 13:07 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] maintenance: add an " Karthik Nayak
2025-11-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] reftable/stack: return stack segments directly Karthik Nayak
2025-11-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] reftable/stack: add function to check if optimization is required Karthik Nayak
2025-11-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] refs: add a `optimize_required` field to `struct ref_storage_be` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] maintenance: add checking logic in `pack_refs_condition()` Karthik Nayak
2025-11-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] maintenance: add 'is-needed' subcommand Karthik Nayak
2025-11-10 6:46 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] maintenance: add an " Patrick Steinhardt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aQi1e0zWfRaxSKtz@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=karthik.188@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).