Re: [PATCH] builtin/pack-objects: don't fetch objects when merging packs

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 01:44:59PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> The "--stdin-packs" option can be used to merge objects from multiple
> packfiles given via stdin into a new packfile. One big upside of this
> option is that we don't have to perform a complete rev walk to enumerate
> objects. Instead, we can simply enumerate all objects that are part of
> the specified packfiles, which can be significantly faster in very large
> repositories.
>
> There is one downside though: when we don't perform a rev walk we also
> don't have a good way to learn about the respective object's names. As a
> consequence, we cannot use the name hashes as a heuristic to get better
> delta selection.
>
> We try to offset this downside though by performing a localized rev
> walk: we queue all objects that we're about to repack as interesting,
> and all objects from excluded packfiles as uninteresting. We then
> perform a best-effort rev walk that allows us to fill in object names.

Nicely explained. I think it's reasonable to ask "well why are we doing
a revwalk, you just told me that --stdin-packs does not require a
(potentially expensive) traversal?". I think that the exposition you
provided here answers that question nicely.

> There is one gotcha here though: when "--exclude-promisor-objects" has
> not been given we will perform backfill fetches for any promised objects
> that are missing. This used to not be an issue though as this option was
> mutually exclusive with "--stdin-packs". But that has changed recently,
> and starting with dcc9c7ef47 (builtin/repack: handle promisor packs with
> geometric repacking, 2026-01-05) we will now repack promisor packs
> during geometric compaction. The consequence is that a geometric repack
> may now perform a bunch of backfill fetches.

Great find!

> We of course cannot passe "--exclude-promisor-objects" to fix this

s/passe/pass, though I think Junio noted this below.

> issue -- after all, the whole intent is to repack objects part of a
> promisor pack. But arguably we don't have to: the rev walk is intended
> as best effort, and we already configure it to ignore missing links to
> other objects. So we can adapt the walk to unconditionally disable
> fetching any missing objects.

Yep, I think this is the right trade-off.

> ---
>  builtin/pack-objects.c        | 10 ++++++++++
>  t/t5331-pack-objects-stdin.sh | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)

The implementation and test look exactly as expected. Thanks for jumping
on this and fixing it!

Thanks,
Taylor