"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > This conflicts (in a subtle way) with Dana How's > "sha1_file.c:rearrange_packed_git() should consider packs' object > sizes" patch as we now have num_objects = 0 for any indexes we > have not opened. In the case of Dana's patch this would cause > those packfiles to have very high ranks, possibly sorting much > later than they should have. I am keeping that rearrange stuff on hold, partly because I am moderately hesitant to do the fp, which feels overkill at that low level of code. Also, I am hoping that we can discard that the object density criteria altogether by making the default repack behaviour friendlier to the pathological cases, e.g. by emitting huge blobs at the end of the packstream, potentially pushing it out to later parts of split packs by themselves and automatically marking them with the .keep flag. Until that kind of improvements materialize, people with pathological cases could (1) handcraft a pack that contains only megablob, (2) place that on central alternate, (3) touch it with artificially old timestamp, which hopefully is a good enough workaround. - 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
