Re: worktrees vs. alternates

From: Martin Fick <mfick@codeaurora.org>
Date: May 16, 2018, 18:26 UTC
Message-ID: <1950199.Z2x8tXoTfI@mfick-lnx>
In-Reply-To: <a933cb3a-6c04-d963-aeda-b5850ca8994c@linuxfoundation.org>

On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 02:12:24 PM Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> The loose objects I'm thinking of are those that are
> generated when we do "git repack -Ad" -- this takes all
> unreachable objects and loosens them (see man git-repack
> for more info). Normally, these would be pruned after a
> certain period, but we're deliberately keeping them
> around forever just in case another repo relies on them
> via alternates. I want those repos to "claim" these loose
> objects via hardlinks, such that we can run git-prune on
> the mother repo instead of dragging all the unreachable
> objects on forever just in case.

If you are going to keep the unreferenced objects around forever, it might be better to keep them around in packed form? We currently do that because we don't think there is a safe way to prune objects yet on a running server (which is why I am teaching jgit to be able to recover from a racy pruning error),

-Martin

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code 
Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation