From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 110EE186A for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2025 05:53:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.145 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765346042; cv=none; b=JzAdw02b38eNX/GvPiZMqIPPTAei32oknStQSsU4kteJwd8bOBG/T8OrwUF/yWRWqDpdWUbTPoklmoX1b2xk0qvnJ+MXdcEFwuu3sUVxESzA5xcWgJ0A4O/qyaY0pw9EWVpK68q1WoUmJq09PtmBieRJFEoijSmY25cWJ/NPpsM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765346042; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+EjBNrkd8NJHJA5D2TwtyQLpfPetuNYCGZeh6KV18dc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=E7EchIKULyk5Ixr2jBxNGlY+qH2eTN7pDu1iSALoe7+bOnhzZOKRP5eOXn7lFp5TOADuVqmEe+oEokTizs3nKBM3tLGX1+M0InRSSpXz9Xbs1LP95L+1lkRt2e95hPQb1nWN2blWxpsFn1HmhLxMDf3dnBwh1SfATodPV9eTZD4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=dZ1MMGtw; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=X8c3wa5o; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.145 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="dZ1MMGtw"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="X8c3wa5o" Received: from phl-compute-05.internal (phl-compute-05.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id F21EAEC01CB; Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:53:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-05.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:53:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1765346037; x=1765432437; bh=+EjBNrkd8N JHJA5D2TwtyQLpfPetuNYCGZeh6KV18dc=; b=dZ1MMGtw6GggwzMNdb+/masJzV sLbpkwH6vq5zyIkKp4JBDaZBRX604E+kV5w0w+bG1nxXPYx5CkiIdwglA013DVpZ 9rFHM0spNl1mTvJyAQw7B9NPFZLy5LqJga4MJUkeLQ1wBDpAA4nEJgjSmopS15eF 6piUJwL2vyrHKvfy3tX83rMOaQXA+ewyRIJhm2K2wJ40Ld8GTc1jJ62iLYE3BK0h Kb/581pvUegP0cj1kzZjcGdYreNGAtOXJplaMFPMP7GlWXtRzdDJzqSwAnOTVPp2 kbEJkpyAxSB2ACJaOVfyeW24AboEPDSlOS7txu4FycHAc6URshQgMHtVjbEg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1765346037; x=1765432437; bh=+EjBNrkd8NJHJA5D2TwtyQLpfPetuNYCGZe h6KV18dc=; b=X8c3wa5oJb6rAIGlH4LCJwtATkUu+uskPaCsjKQ3mh+wUdxCKSX A6YTeB27fBHmMA8J/1+h+oI1kVM1FXWuuMEGnhb/ttOHvtmH1UYjtd6dW2/omf80 jtswYwflezuMPQi1iYGt0cSECW1Q6ytZIsekpE/P/KTKxC9F3+3ylE7i1tCHF+5i 0WSHnPavTSTogNrKG/aqDfxv08ouoeA4bNxnEFEdl1sbsdhw8K2lUHnPhF7QB+n7 coHme+svwRKVH0Uj6I3hxtuYrUztFE0OSI6t6SqALtjzVKhA2FluqjTe19trsVFY oud1xla8nShgMUDs12olRA4+gcMNF4Ruvpw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefgedrtddtgddvudeigecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhitghk ucfuthgvihhnhhgrrhguthcuoehpshesphhkshdrihhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpe evkeekfffhiedtleduiefgjedttedvledvudehgfeugedugffhueekhfejvdektdenucev lhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpshesphhksh drihhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedvpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthho pehjlhhtohgslhgvrhesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrh drkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:53:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id bd86aabb (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Wed, 10 Dec 2025 05:53:55 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 06:53:51 +0100 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Justin Tobler Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] odb: resolve relative alternative paths when parsing Message-ID: References: <20251208-b4-pks-odb-alternates-via-source-v1-0-e7ebb8b18c03@pks.im> <20251208-b4-pks-odb-alternates-via-source-v1-2-e7ebb8b18c03@pks.im> <5lkaw3kfqzjt45jhomeb34cqu6nxigapmobtqrzpyoq7mh6655@3zgqsyfui23j> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5lkaw3kfqzjt45jhomeb34cqu6nxigapmobtqrzpyoq7mh6655@3zgqsyfui23j> On Tue, Dec 09, 2025 at 12:06:09PM -0600, Justin Tobler wrote: > On a semi-related note, part of me thinks it would be nice if alternate > sources were a bit more first class in `struct object_database`. IOW, > explicitly defining the primary and list of alternate sources > separately. From the perspective of reading objects, having a single > list of sources is nice, but when writing objects only the first source > is used. This isn't too big of a deal, but certain operations like ODB > trasactions will reorder the source list to change where objects get > written to which feels a bit fragile to me. I guess another way to > resolve this concern could be to change ODB transactions to use a > separate mechanism though. Agreed, especially the writing side is a bit weird, and reordering sources when we create transactions is one of the weirdest parts. I think this is out of scope for this patch series, but I certainly think that we should address this by polishing the ODB transactions a bit going forward. Thanks! Patrick