Re: [PATCH 4/4] gc docs: downplay the usefulness of --aggressive

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

 



Hi,

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> --- a/Documentation/git-gc.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-gc.txt
> @@ -41,10 +41,20 @@ OPTIONS
>  --aggressive::
>  	Usually 'git gc' runs very quickly while providing good disk
>  	space utilization and performance.  This option will cause
> -	'git gc' to more aggressively optimize the repository at the expense
> -	of taking much more time.  The effects of this optimization are
> -	persistent, so this option only needs to be used occasionally; every
> -	few hundred changesets or so.
> +	'git gc' to more aggressively optimize the repository to save storage space
> +	at the expense of taking much more time.

This part looks good.

> ++
> +Using this option may optimize for disk space at the expense of
> +runtime performance. See the `--depth` and `--window` documentation in
> +linkgit:git-repack[1]. It is not recommended that this option be used
> +to improve performance for a given repository without running tailored
> +performance benchmarks on it. It may make things better, or worse. Not
> +using this at all is the right trade-off for most users and their
> +repositories.

This part kind of feels like giving up.  Can we make --aggressive have
good runtime read performance so we don't have to hedge this way?
E.g. is this patch papering over a poor choice of --depth setting in
--aggressive?

> ++
> +The effects of this option are persistent to the extent that
> +`gc.autoPackLimit` and friends don't cause a consolidation of existing
> +pack(s) generated with this option.

Thanks and hope that helps,
Jonathan



[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]

  Powered by Linux