On Thursday, August 08, 2013 10:56:38 am Junio C Hamano wrote: > I thought the discussion was about making the local gc > cheaper, and the "Imagine we have a cheap way" was to > address it by assuming that the daily "pack young > objects into a single pack" can be sped up if we did not > have to traverse history. More permanent packs (the > older ones in "set of packs staggered by age" Martin > proposes) in the repository should go through the normal > history traversal route. Assuming I understand what you are suggesting, would these "young object" likely still get "deduped" in an efficient way without doing history traversal (it sounds like they would)? In other words, if I understand correctly, it would save time by not pruning unreferenced objects, but it would still be deduping things and delta compressing also, so you would still likely get a great benefit from creating these young object packs? In other words, is there still a good chance that my 317 new pack files which included a 33M pack file will still get consolidated down to something near 8M? If so, then yeah this might be nice, especially if the history traversal is what would speed this up. Because today, my solution mostly saves IO and not time. I think it still saves time, I believe I have seen up to a 50% savings, but that is nothing compared to massive, several orders of magnitude IO savings. But if what you suggest could also give massive time (orders of magnitude) savings along with the IO improvements I am seeing, then suddenly repacking regularly would become very cheap even on large repos. The only time consuming piece would be pruning then? Could bitmaps eventually help out there? -Martin -- The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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