From: Jeff King Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 13:02:48 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: protect against disappearing packs Message-ID: <20111014130247.GA7808@sigill.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: 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 Thanks for reviewing. > > 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