On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 01:57:00PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > - The scenario I want to address (and that I assumed the patch series > under discussion tried to address, too) is a very specific, server-side > scenario where many `merge-tree`/`replay` runs produce _many_ loose > objects. Quite a fraction of those are produced by processes that run > into a SIGTERM-enforced timeout, and the `tmp_objdir` approach would > naturally help: unneeded loose objects would not even be added to the > primary object database but be reaped with the temporary object > databases. Thanks, this paragraph helped me to understand why you are interested in tmp_objdir in the first place (as opposed to just doing a gc-auto repack after finishing the merge). -Peff
