From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.cendio.se (mail.cendio.se [193.12.253.120]) (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 0E63F243364 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 09:10:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.12.253.120 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740388235; cv=none; b=Vs0bi32TrwhscYT5XPKvHoaNOZjWG5Y+fhHzVyoLfAmbeL1aGmRRhLC0QEkHXWDjW7l5O30YcYbT+IzaDXhVrmhnhcB4tBoHGpl/8lP7HDLekShke0XGnkX0zc9eW4ITFUrD8aJZ0PGksZOuN+bpJt8dBKk/kkNJtSXb9BGaTw8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740388235; c=relaxed/simple; bh=k0jSSuQRtViPtuvqk7JljIdGtHWQINwQPYkS+IqPmJM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=t9xryBzhizh720sU+QZNLT/olpL71QTzm32AsBgyoWUU47EZFRbXr52JMs6P7GqIiHSJB3QhGKHIsLb+tugtRhiLYzCmOFAkJrkiaNHJwT9iWeVjO3Zgf46wuoYSBFC+OMMPYtQt5x0oaRGlksk9HpAI+eVk6U93ZdiRdS9VFsQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cendio.se; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cendio.se; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cendio.se header.i=@cendio.se header.b=5BtQjIpI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.12.253.120 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cendio.se Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cendio.se Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cendio.se header.i=@cendio.se header.b="5BtQjIpI" Received: from [IPV6:2a00:801:107:4700:e2be:3ff:fe9d:f27] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:801:107:4700:e2be:3ff:fe9d:f27]) by mail.cendio.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE120183613C; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:10:23 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail.cendio.se AE120183613C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cendio.se; s=20250112; t=1740388223; bh=xQQuG62EfXaOpZGkufjzIDELyNx2R0u7bML7jDKFvcM=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=5BtQjIpIOQ1Wc6C6fL+5NPagG+2QZLivcWwO+pWMixpvZfNHK3NedeDd1UlmUrBFN KZhOli+QY10st7xBjWmTYkCrJDLioAZ5yE0EbHApN/67pqe/DUCnyYYG93PAdODmmd 2/RQ74EyVfnAGtrgKxMIhH4PMFqTNbtoSA1FIC3RwVwuwdM6jzyZkQaWQpR5/suLRF rgvcKt0XcVQUIwpuWE4uXIjmw+y5fsh7YvFUBFN3IrsIDhSVnRrPxeuuIiq0gcL+T3 BcEVeF15IsQvFN80NjPLTwBhiJpsmnAN57BXWO1Pu0SE5IAMVWMzDOF2NmGml6ynXk kf47fj074q5Cw== Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:10:23 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [External] git keeps recreating packs, exploding backup increments Content-Language: en-US To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: Han Young , git@vger.kernel.org References: <1524b9a5-6f8b-4537-ba6b-bdfdd4b1bdcb@cendio.se> From: Pierre Ossman Organization: Cendio AB In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 21/02/2025 09:16, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: >> >> Anything I/we can do to shed more light on the issue? > > Well, one of the interesting things to learn would be how often you end > up updating those repositories. You have discovered "gc.autoPackLimit" > already, which determines when exactly Git is going to repack existing > packfiles into one, and mentioned that it doesn't seem to help you. But > whether it does or doesn't help really depends on how frequently you > gain new packfiles in the impacted repositories. > > When you have fast-moving repositories and developers fetch several > times per day, then it is quite likely that they accumulate multiple new > packfiles per day. And thus, it's not all that unexpected that you will > have to repack the whole repository rather regularly. If so, this is > working as designed. You can tune the parameters for how often Git will > do an all-into-one repack, but also have to keep in mind that the more > packfiles there are, the less efficient Git will in general be. > I don't think the most problematic repo should be moving that fast. But I might be wrong. We've reverted all settings to default, and we'll try to keep an eye on what happens to the pack files to gain more understanding. > That being said, there is an alternative: Git nowadays doesn't use > git-gc(1) anymore to perform auto-maintenance, but instead it invokes > git-maintenance(1). And that command allows the user to pick what tasks > should be performed. By default it uses git-gc(1) under the hood indeed, > but you also ask it to not do so and instead use an alternative > mechanism to pack your objects. > Thanks. This is definitely something we can try. We'll observe the system for now, to establish a new baseline. Then we'll try some of these settings and see how it affect things. Regards, -- Pierre Ossman Software Development Cendio AB https://cendio.com Teknikringen 8 https://twitter.com/ThinLinc 583 30 Linköping https://facebook.com/ThinLinc Phone: +46-13-214600 A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?