Re: git gc & deleted branches

> On Fri, 9 May 2008, Brandon Casey wrote:
> 
>> Geert Bosch wrote:
>>> On May 9, 2008, at 00:19, Jeff King wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like it. It makes an easy rule to say "packed objects _never_ get
>>>> pruned, they only get demoted to loose objects." And then of course
>>>> we have sane rules for pruning loose objects.
>>> Isn't there an issue with the "git gc" triggering because there
>>> may be too many loose unreferenced objects?
>>> Still, I do like the approach.
>> This would be an argument for going the extra mile and having the loose
>> objects adopt the timestamp of their pack file. In the normal case they
>> would probably be pruned immediately during the same git-gc run.
> 
> Well, not necessarily.  If you created a large branch yesterday and you 
> are deleting it today, then if you repacked in between means that those 
> loose objects won't be more than one day old.  Yet there could be enough 
> of them to trigger auto gc.  But that auto gc won't pack those objects 
> since they are unreferenced.  Hence auto gc will trigger all the time 
> without making any progress.