On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 11:23:02AM -0800, Elijah Newren wrote: > > The original idea behind this approach was that smaller cruft packs > > would get combined together until the sum of their sizes was no larger > > than the given max pack size. > > > > There is a much simpler way to achieve this, however, which is to simply > > combine *all* cruft packs which are smaller than the threshold, > > regardless of what their sum is. With '--max-pack-size', 'pack-objects' > > will split out the resulting pack into individual pack(s) if necessary > > to ensure that the written pack(s) are each no larger than the provided > > threshold. > > That doesn't really "achieve this" though, unless the antecedent of > "this" isn't what was described in the previous paragraph but > something elsewhere. I suspect your actual meaning was something > along the lines of "There is a much simpler way to combine cruft > packs, however, which..." ? Great suggestion, thanks. I swapped out "achieve this" for your recommendation. > > This yields a slight behavior change, which is reflected in the removed > > test. Previous to this change, we would aggregate smaller cruft packs > > first, whereas now we will opportunistically combine as many cruft packs > > as possible. As as result, that test is no longer relevant, and can be > > deleted. > > I like the idea, since it sounds like it should be simpler... Heh. I don't know why I wrote it the way it was originally. I wrote the second patch in this series first, and when I was trying to explain how multi-cruft pack aggregation works I paused and then wrote what is now the first patch. Hindsight is 20/20, I suppose ;-). Thanks, Taylor
