Re: [PATCH] repack: respect gc.pid lock

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

 



On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 08:10:24PM +0000, David Turner wrote:

> > Is "-a" or "-A" the key factor? Are there current callers who prefer the current
> > behavior of "possibly duplicate some work, but never report failure" versus "do
> > not duplicate work, but sometimes fail due to lock contention"?
> 
> One problem with failing is that it can leave a temp pack behind.

Yeah. IMHO we should probably treat failed object and pack writes as
normal tempfiles and remove them (but possibly respect a "debug mode"
that leaves them around). But that's another patch entirely.

> I think the correct fix is to change the default code.packedGitLimit on 64-bit 
> machines to 32 terabytes (2**45 bytes).  That's because on modern Intel 
> processors, there are 48 bits of address space actually available, but the kernel 
> is going to probably reserve a few bits.  My machine claims to have 2**46 bytes 
> of virtual address space available.  It's also several times bigger than any 
> repo that I know of or can easily imagine.
> 
> Does that seem reasonable to you?

Yes, it does.

-Peff



[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]