git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Kevin Puetz <PuetzKevinA@johndeere.com>,
	 "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>,
	 "git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug] git fetch --dry-run --filter makes changes to .git/config
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 13:28:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqms6r7bf7.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250918192045.GA1187769@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 18 Sep 2025 15:20:45 -0400")

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> It would probably be better if it established a separate tmp-objdir area
> (like we do for pushes before we commit to storing them), fetched the
> objects into that, and then threw away the result. That technique did
> not exist back when "fetch --dry-run" was added, but it probably
> wouldn't be too hard to do now.

It is true that the quarantine mechanism did not exist.  But I am
not sure if a true dryness is actually better.  We do verify that
the incoming objects thrown at us by the other side are healthy, so
the only difference is that our object database will have extra
unreachable objects that are known to be healthy between the time
you run a dry fetch and the time you then run a real one.  And these
extra objects that are healthy will help your real fetch go faster
if the dry fetch and real fetch are run back to back thanks to "do
we have all the necessary objects already, just that they may not be
connected to the refs yet?" check.

So it may not be hard with the building blocks, but I am not sure if
it is a good idea to do so in the first place.

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-18 20:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-17 14:44 [Bug] git fetch --dry-run --filter makes changes to .git/config Kevin Puetz
2025-09-17 21:21 ` brian m. carlson
2025-09-17 23:23   ` Kevin Puetz
2025-09-18 19:20     ` Jeff King
2025-09-18 20:28       ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2025-09-18 20:39         ` Jeff King
2025-09-18 20:46           ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-18 21:55       ` Kevin Puetz
2025-09-18 22:21         ` rsbecker
2025-09-19 15:31           ` Kevin Puetz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqms6r7bf7.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=PuetzKevinA@johndeere.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).