Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] packfile: allow content-limit for cat-file

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:

> I don't have a huge problem with "content_limit" as a name, but perhaps
> "content_size_limit", "streaming_limit", or "streaming_threshold" (with
> a vague preference towards the latter) might be more descriptive? I
> dunno.

Your statement does highlight the second point that should have been
pointed out, but I failed to.  The "limit" is about "maximum content
size" (as opposed to content type or color or smell), but also it is
important to avoid sounding like we are forbidding a blob to exist
if it is larger than that limit.  The limit is only about whether
the contents are prefetched through the contentp pointer (and
anything larger than the limit must be obtained via a separate API
call to obtain the contents).

We can flip the polarity to say "minimum content size to stream"
(i.e., anything larger than this threshold will be streamed out
instead of held in core at once), and it may certainly be a better
way to explain what is going on than "maximum content size to be
held in-core via contentp".

Thanks.