On 6/30/22 1:11 PM, Eric D wrote:
I can appreciate the concerns expressed here: https://github.com/git/git/commit/d989b266c1a7ef47f27cec75e90f3dfefbfa0200 However, in my environment, our file servers are very capable and have the requisite support. It would be great if there was an option to override this check and allow fsmonitor to operate against network filesystems.
Yeah, I was just being cautious. I probably should have also added concerns on the remote system being an actual Windows server or a non-Windows host running SAMBA. There were just too many combinations for me to be comfortable enabling it by default (on the initial release, at least). Also, the ReadDirectoryChangesW() API limits the buffer size to 64k for remote handles (because of protocol limitations), so there _may_ be more of an opportunity for dropped events on very busy remote file systems. (I never saw any dropped events in my testing (without intentionally breaking things), but it is a possible concern, so again, caution and safety...) And I do handle dropped events and force a resync and send the client a "trivial" response (so it must do a regular scan), so output is still correct, but slower. Having said all of that, I did do lots of testing and never had an issue with remote drives actually working correctly, so I think it'd be fine allow a config setting to optionally allow it. I just didn't want to clutter up things in advance if no one actually wanted to use it on remote file systems. I think it would be fine to have a "fsmonitor.allowRemote" or "fsmonitor.allowWindowsRemote" config setting and default them to false for now. Or until we learn which combinations of remote mounts are safe and/or problematic. Jeff
