From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Subject: Re: Large repo and pack.packsizelimit Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 09:36:10 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <37267143.413194.1336046278583.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail07.arcor-online.net> <20120508203137.GA15707@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120508212012.GA20044@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 09 12:35:26 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SS4Et-0006ip-TB for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 09 May 2012 12:35:24 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756254Ab2EIKfH (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2012 06:35:07 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:51043 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753772Ab2EIKfF (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2012 06:35:05 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SS4Ea-0006bt-Mt for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 09 May 2012 12:35:04 +0200 Received: from proxy31.sbs.de ([194.138.39.61]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 09 May 2012 12:35:04 +0200 Received: from th.acker66 by proxy31.sbs.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 09 May 2012 12:35:04 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 194.138.39.61 (Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/535.19 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/18.0.1025.168 Safari/535.19) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre fluxnic.net> writes: > > On Tue, 8 May 2012, Jeff King wrote: > > > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 05:13:13PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > > > > This should be fixed in git. Unfortunately, I don't know that it is as > > > > trivial as just splitting the incoming stream; we would also have to > > > > make sure that there were no cross-pack deltas in the result. > > > > > > IMHO this is the wrong fix. The pack size limit was created to deal > > > with storage media with limited capacity. In this case, the repack > > > process should be told to limit its memory usage, and pack-index should > > > simply be taught to cope. > > > > Hmm, you're right. I was thinking it helped to deal with memory > > addressing issues for 32-bit systems, but I guess > > core.packedGitWindowSize should be handling that. IOW, the 10G packfile > > should work just fine for normal access. > > > > However, the OP did say he got an "out of memory" error during the > > clone. So maybe there is a problem to be fixed in index-pack there. > > Was the OOM on the remote side (pack-objects) or on the local side > (index-pack) ? > > Nicolas > To be exact I did the clone locally on the same machine and so the clone itself worked but I got the OOM during the first fetch. I "fixed" this by setting transfer.unpacklimit=100000 which caused only loose objects to be transfered. So in this case I think the OOM was on the remote side. But there is another OOM if I try to repack locally. It seems to me that neither pack-objects nor index-pack respekt pack.packsizelimit and always try to pack all objects to be transferred resp. all local loose objects in one pack. I could live wth the transfer.unpacklimit=100000 but the local OOM stops me from using the cloned repo. --- Thomas