Re: [PATCH] Split sample update hook into post-receive hook

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Mar 8, 2007, 09:13 UTC
Message-ID: <20070308091313.GC30289@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vy7m8aytt.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> I suspect that it is deeper than that.  Think about why having
> "everything at once" is better than "one at a time".
> 
> Potentially you could have a rule that says "these should be
> updated together" (or the other way around).  If you split the
> set of refs at arbitrary limit, like xargs does, you would lose
> that advantage.

Yes, I think the documentation says something about that... ;-)

> We could take stdin to solve that and shell
> scripts should be able to handle that as refnames do not contain
> shell metacharacters.

Never even occurred to me, because I was trying to keep the hook interface "simple".

Show 6 quoted lines

> But this is only true if you want to make it really nice.  I
> personally feel that nobody would scream if pushing 1300 refs at
> once (4K pages and MAX_ARG_PAGES at 32 would give 128K for
> **argv and its strings, and one ref's worth of data is two
> 40-digit hex plus refname, roughly 100-byte per ref) is not
> supported and always failed.

Agree completely. I'm not too worried about it. 1300 ref push is just not going to really occur in practice; that is just insane. 30 refs, maybe.

-- 
Shawn.