Re: [BUG] t9801 and t9803 broken on next

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

 



> On 19 May 2016, at 19:03, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> From my point of view little packs are no problem. I run fast-import on
>> a dedicated migration machine. After fast-import completion I run repack [1] 
>> before I upload the repo to its final location.
> 
> How do you determine that many little packs are not a problem to
> you, though?  Until they get repacked, they are where the
> fast-import will get existing objects from.  The more little packs
> you accumulate as you go, the more slow fast-import's access to them
> has to become.
True. But my particular use case is a one time operation for a given
repository. Therefore I don't care how long it takes. The only important
aspect is that the result is correct.

That being said, Peff's proposed fix looks correct to me but since I 
am no fast-import expert my opinion doesn't count too much.

- Lars

--
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]