Re: [PATCH] handle concurrent pruning of packed objects

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> That shouldn't make a difference for correctness, even if the old packs
> are still there. If you have an object in two packs, then it doesn't
> matter which one you pull it from. The main impacts I can think of are:
>   1. The old pack may already be mapped, and it would be more efficient
>      to use it. However, the new pack will be mapped on first use, so it
>      will be used from then on.
>   2. The pack list can grow without bound. However, for this to matter,
>      you'd have to do many prunes during the course of a single git
>      command.

I agree 100% on "shouldn't" part.  What I wonder is if everybody
works correctly if we mmap the same file (all available .idx are
mapped all the time, and we map .pack LRU) twice.  But I realize
we have NO_MMAP configuration for unfortunate platforms to work
it around so that wouldn't be a big deal.

-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]