Re: Verifying the whole repository

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Oct 23, 2008, 14:28 UTC
Message-ID: <20081023142804.GA14786@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <b2cdc9f30810230659n15f44f64l571a0df3dbe104d9@mail.gmail.com>

Alex Bennee <kernel-hacker@bennee.com> wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> As git is fundamentally hash based it's a lot easier to determine the
> health of the repository but I wonder if it's possible for silent
> corruption to creep in which won't be noticed until you try and
> checkout a historical commit of the tree. I notice there is a
> git-verify-pack command that checks the pack files are OK. Do any of
> the other commands implicitly ensure all objects in the repo are
> correct and valid? git-gc?

As David pointed out, git fsck can be used to verify all of the hashes, but git-gc also does a quick sanity check using a CRC code when it copies data from one pack to another pack.

Unlike CVS Git has a write-once, read-many mentality, so with the exception of git gc (err, actually the git repack it calls) git never modifies an existing file. That really helps to reduce the risk of corruption.

If you never do a gc or fsck operation (but still use say commit or push into the repository) then yes, silent corruption can still sneak up on you in the form of disk block corruption.

> Are there any other parts of the .git metadata that are crucial or is
> it enough to say if all objects and packs match their hashes you have
> all the information you may need to recover an arbitrary revision of
> the repo?

Don't forget about the loose objects under .git/objects/?? but otherwise yes, you just need the object data. The refs under .git/refs are also useful, but the tips can be recovered if the refs space is lost by "git fsck --unreachable".

-- 
Shawn.