Re: [PATCH 0/3] Another approach to large transactions

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

 



On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:14:08PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:

> > FWIW, we already use a magic value of "25 extra" in open_packed_git_1. I
> > don't know if that means the number has been proven in practice, or if
> > it is simply that nobody actually exercises the pack_max_fds code. I
> > suspect it is the latter, especially since d131b7a (sha1_file.c: Don't
> > retain open fds on small packs, 2011-03-02).
> 
> 25 is equally sound as I could not find any hard calculation on that
> number in the
> history or code. I will change it to 25 in the next version of the patch.

FWIW, I think 32 is just fine, too, and the patch doesn't need re-rolled
because of this. I mostly wanted to point out that yes, indeed, we use
this "eh, a few dozen is probably enough" strategy elsewhere. Which
maybe, sort-of validates it. :)

-Peff
--
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




[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]