From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.153]) (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 16D2BBA3D for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2024 00:37:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728261434; cv=none; b=fixjBb4MeJbDumex56rNYo9IzdfKxmdMNyqGmdWG6gE0YIb1YggjmUS4Gb/hrDMfpk134POSHJ51ke293c9FSg2W4nlyaCY2IVr8G8FQYK9FCaq8DCe7hfktEnN9XB9g/CcS1wpttmTIwo3zogn0mfxM7IaiT+fppcLFhOIROQk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728261434; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uT6rgJQ+CkoVdBGV/ZKE5ixNJCeks6naptrta0wsCnY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=adj2q/WftF8pS0JdSDKyQJETHca8R+6HSFr/Rd5zSbod4s60BXBYCebSGXQNMdB4fC1qKWcPn5GPkqWlY/aQww6ZsDxx/AjV55Qb+zJvw996pSxmRmlBSNwcS6Q0kL/ry+qqHKnSRkJvEZy4cRu3GN4q3W6HlfuoACuVg0e8nQY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=CIon0VDx; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=ppIMuh9p; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="CIon0VDx"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="ppIMuh9p" Received: from phl-compute-03.internal (phl-compute-03.phl.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA711140124; Sun, 6 Oct 2024 20:37:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-03.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 06 Oct 2024 20:37:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1728261431; x=1728347831; bh=EatwJgKkkY gBF3DeAnj1x/SbQEBoEXOypQ8VyIlwGPQ=; b=CIon0VDxwvtIYUTfMrj25TJeM0 35osYrosVnqemUFTsGJF880ZrIXkZ7CB+MtxDPz5WdJxq5H/rZ7nQxALol+sQAgQ c4DNaKqI2fDcOpngErFC5bxjODwLchmCbPHDLUalal/Gp3sjN4vS0+vNKQN0Jq/Q NbJFR8b7zAx7YrBudRC2tSotT9l6AbXtPRj3I39c9MIdVkC9pb0aXsW+0ir6JiuH MmdTlU677gatTTJlj3WG/a0NAhCXq3wlO7ciulMQsob4CaCltUwqFKIE5qikuAa5 1cg39DKm7NjSV64JrhqBH06vhNTvLEkUWVdHHwYjES8ddzcTUrDGAIBQI1bg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1728261431; x=1728347831; bh=EatwJgKkkYgBF3DeAnj1x/SbQEBo EXOypQ8VyIlwGPQ=; b=ppIMuh9pLLoe/vkL70kEFKJzuIxxzMxOspU4EldHLQkp eW7rQfwcqJO0shmQ7PeCX5zOAXkZOp49LBx+09kD28h5vFG9sHoUVV2gBU8xllqs QEqceG+CwWO+NxMrLk978kDoL2uAJgHImygLDmaVRYI4yxkU8FW5qegf5wBaoRAc 38TNYYkVj9fefBZcmQFGAZk9vbuXIZsUw9UG6cDhiWTUSUBBBdg4ZlKLKV/TExPB 5tg2GjmYEL21+6yfrxuLf7XKpZxAQ62dkXbVJuGDqWTy+E8f1Nm2wObIvsi92yFa 7jgm0IYpMx2zcE6mIy5kBP/k2CJmwKhWBvUw/ZsDZw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrvddvkedgfeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtofdttdertden ucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogi drtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepgfetjeegudevueetieduhffhgedutdejhfej vdffleetlefhtdevjeeuheduffeunecuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenuc evlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgihhtshht vghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeekpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpoh huthdprhgtphhtthhopehrohgsvghrthdrtghouhhpsehkohhorhguihhnrghtvghsrdgt ohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepvghmihhlhihshhgrfhhfvghrsehgohhoghhlvgdrtghomhdprh gtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtoheptggr lhhvihhnfigrnhesghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohephhgrnhihrghnghdrth honhihsegshihtvggurghntggvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepjhhonhgrthhhrghnthgr nhhmhiesghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepshhokhgtvghvihgtsehgohhogh hlvgdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 6 Oct 2024 20:37:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Robert Coup Cc: Emily Shaffer , git@vger.kernel.org, Calvin Wan , Han Young , Jonathan Tan , sokcevic@google.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] promisor-remote: always JIT fetch with --refetch In-Reply-To: (Robert Coup's message of "Mon, 7 Oct 2024 01:21:16 +0100") References: <20241003223546.1935471-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 17:37:08 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Robert Coup writes: > Basically --refetch was originally designed to send no 'have's during a fetch, > the original motivation being changing a partial clone filter and fetching > all the newly-applicable trees & blobs in a single transfer. > ... > If a commit is missing that's one way to fix > it, but it's a pretty nuclear option: feels like your option iv (terminate with > an error) leading to fsck invoking/suggesting --refetch might avoid > unintentionally recloning the entire repo. > ... > In my original RFC [3], Jonathan Tan suggested that --refetch could be useful > to repair missing objects like this, but it was out of scope for me at the time. > But maybe there's a way to improve it for this sort of case? > > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20220202185957.1928631-1-jonathantanmy@google.com/ Thanks for your comments on the original story behind that option. > I presume there wasn't an obvious/related cause for commit 6aaaca to go missing > in the first place? Emily had this after the three-dash line a: That commit object went missing as a byproduct of this partial clone gc issue that Calvin, Jonathan, Han Young, and others have been investigating: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20241001191811.1934900-1-calvinwan@google.com/ IOW, I think how the lossage was caused is well understood by now. Thanks.