From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ABE5C433F5 for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 20:05:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1352605AbiETUFf (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2022 16:05:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41652 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236170AbiETUFe (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2022 16:05:34 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd2a.google.com (mail-io1-xd2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82BD819CB55 for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 13:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd2a.google.com with SMTP id n145so250366iod.3 for ; Fri, 20 May 2022 13:05:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=google; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+f5frLtBYu5G8ILhSlrVy+3QnjFoc2zSFu9hcXDjfuo=; b=XklvFUXPlErGDBxXU94kpbylaFb2j8XPuB95H8QKw4RAR5YQ1sK0uUCYRgewo5SM6T HpjazvAtm+GG0X1YeA4hD+RIM55vjm2TXldgLeXWSfzqjoZ0zz4CIAkHzPpLrWe6P7PT M1alYq0Tx0PVsbEqKkOSn/teBRRAFc5zviKGwFJarqKMGba5xq3LfsVPzbWe8LPgqD64 tmXr7kTQ+kJIZAmAYGosMXZqYSOuzHy1P2/efLSrP8mW28bhOM7ykM/o8LVGr/dFFbWp 0JpOufcDNLca4rFo/24YzfKeWmNNnhmjz64rrrB/YpZdGECxuLBpO8P6Y98Eoqw5YapK U9eQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+f5frLtBYu5G8ILhSlrVy+3QnjFoc2zSFu9hcXDjfuo=; b=LG8wLWOGgt67hggNcHeSIXKy90mWys9tNEwnU2mHzRRaIE23goZMg2vUK266cca0/H 5coUUoApRWKGgmmOYHm1r9uPeFfTfmYifa7UKlIgkwwHq8ZMCRfCiFYMEzFn0pXNuUKV 5/m5+WahAsQhiVdvbu2JNPqb4yY9uC4FS45PtPJlJ84gQVDGi3PuULFdTJzx9oBxNLVL 5syt5PdmjYd8fQ0VE/JpexnNsTgLgzFslDZlLbT4fbljNRD2f+fj/Mgj5XedgQleu8a2 xJLtnG6KEE8/tQ0d1Bx6PrRZsHlJF6J00g1YxseRjm0tbM6Zcr1bPneEZJEdi3R3Q1DF JVrQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532hQoA5Due9guEkKpYYclOd0qiIINQXznbfNgZ4e05OehXSWOkd hx2nsRh+YPcSdZTk39jU6ral X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIWNx7ogtomTl2TKiiftlEBNfj2b56OCKso/YwTxDhgUK8wtmgfnwGVdMiqqesSaRvA9WBTA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:411f:b0:32e:a114:54e with SMTP id ay31-20020a056638411f00b0032ea114054emr2075147jab.82.1653077131529; Fri, 20 May 2022 13:05:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2600:1700:e72:80a0:34b9:84ab:204:3752? ([2600:1700:e72:80a0:34b9:84ab:204:3752]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y21-20020a027315000000b0032e2e27cd93sm911796jab.82.2022.05.20.13.05.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 20 May 2022 13:05:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 16:05:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] repack: handle --keep-pack, --max-pack-size for geometric repacks Content-Language: en-US To: Victoria Dye , Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org Cc: gitster@pobox.com References: <5517f0f8-871c-a155-7d8c-d0d6086bb7d2@github.com> From: Derrick Stolee In-Reply-To: <5517f0f8-871c-a155-7d8c-d0d6086bb7d2@github.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 5/20/2022 3:46 PM, Victoria Dye wrote: > Taylor Blau wrote: >> This series fixes two issues that Victoria and I noticed while working on an >> unrelated issue yesterday. >> >> - The first patch comes from Victoria's earlier submission[1], and addresses >> an issue where packs specified as kept via the `--keep-pack` option could >> potentially be removed (without rewriting their objects) during a >> `--geometric` repack. >> >> The first patch is Victoria's alone, with some minor fixups applied from my >> review in [2]. It's included in this series since it's related, and avoids >> any conflicts when merging. >> > > I'm happy with the fixes you applied here and don't have anything else I'd > like to add this patch. > >> - The latter two patches are mine, and address an issue where specifying a >> `--max-pack-size` value during a `--geometric` repack could result in object >> loss because of a false positive in our "did we write a pack with this >> name?" check (which can occur when the list of packs we wrote isn't sorted). >> >> The first of these two patches demonstrates the issue (done in a separate >> patch, since the scenario is quite involved), and the second patch fixes the >> bug. >> > > I was worried about the robustness of the test, but some deeper diving > revealed that it should produce consistent results. Otherwise, the fix > itself is a straightforward (albeit hard to find in the first place). These > two patches look good to me! > >> Thanks in advance for your review. I'm chiming in to say that I also read these patches and think they are good. Couldn't find a way to improve them. Thanks, -Stolee