Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: protect against disappearing packs

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Oct 14, 2011, 13:02 UTC
Message-ID: <20111014130247.GA7808@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1110132234210.17040@xanadu.home>

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:42:28PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:

> > ---
> 
> you should put your SOB above that line I would think.

Thanks. I cheated and wrote my "---" cover letter in the commit message locally, knowing that it would get included by format-patch but stripped by am on Junio's end. Which does work, except that "format-patch -s" puts the SOB in the wrong place. :)

> Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>

Thanks for reviewing.

Show 10 quoted lines

> > We're seeing this at GitHub because we prune pretty
> > aggressively. We let pushes go into individual repositories,
> > but then we kick off a job to move the resulting objects
> > into the repository's "network" repo, which is basically a
> > big alternates repository for related repos.
> 
> While this patch certainly has value, it doesn't provide 100% 
> reliability for that use case.  Maybe the github infrastructure should 
> simply skip any auto-repack on push if some other object maintenance 
> operation is ongoing, possibly via the pre-auto-gc hook.

I'm not sure I understand the problem. We already serialize the re-packing jobs in a queue, so you won't have two repacks going at once. The problematic pack-objects is the one started by upload-pack when somebody fetches. Or do you mean turning off receive.autogc? I'd have to check if we do that, but we definitely should; it's useless to us (though it would be unlikely to trigger anyway, because we are manually repacking so frequently).

-Peff